I was convinced that it's ok to allow a second i8 return value
authorDan Gohman <gohman@apple.com>
Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:04:34 +0000 (01:04 +0000)
committerDan Gohman <gohman@apple.com>
Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:04:34 +0000 (01:04 +0000)
commita96dc14968ded9d4cff2382696cfdb6e40173e8a
treeec3900e32c0df1cbfb88dcbb2cf4e57409d7de49
parent8f4aa333d02d0f48f90f4604d894a73ee53edcb5
I was convinced that it's ok to allow a second i8 return value
to be returned in DL. LLVM's multiple-return-value support is
not ABI-conforming; front-ends that wish to have code emitted
that conforms to an ABI are currently expected to make
arrangements for this on their own rather than assuming that
multiple-return-values will automatically do the right thing.
This commit doesn't fundamentally change this situation.

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@67588 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
lib/Target/X86/X86CallingConv.td