Various tweaks related to apint codegen. No functionality

change for non-funky-sized integers.


git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk@52151 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8

3 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/DAGCombiner.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/DAGCombiner.cpp
index ea96e5c..8696bcf 100644
--- a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/DAGCombiner.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/DAGCombiner.cpp
@@ -1785,7 +1785,7 @@ SDOperand DAGCombiner::visitAND(SDNode *N) {
           // Loading a non-byte sized integer is only valid if the extra bits
           // in memory that complete the byte are zero, which is not known here.
           // TODO: remove isSimple check when apint codegen support lands.
-          EVT.isSimple() && EVT.getSizeInBits() == EVT.getStoreSizeInBits() &&
+          EVT.isSimple() && EVT.isByteSized() &&
           (!AfterLegalize || TLI.isLoadXLegal(ISD::ZEXTLOAD, EVT))) {
         MVT PtrType = N0.getOperand(1).getValueType();
         // For big endian targets, we need to add an offset to the pointer to
@@ -3181,7 +3181,7 @@ SDOperand DAGCombiner::ReduceLoadWidth(SDNode *N) {
       // Do not allow folding to a non-byte-sized integer here.  These only
       // load correctly if the extra bits in memory that complete the byte
       // are zero, which is not known here.
-      VT.getSizeInBits() == VT.getStoreSizeInBits()) {
+      VT.isByteSized()) {
     assert(N0.getValueType().getSizeInBits() > EVTBits &&
            "Cannot truncate to larger type!");
     LoadSDNode *LN0 = cast<LoadSDNode>(N0);
diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypesPromote.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypesPromote.cpp
index b0a8475..5c68fe2 100644
--- a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypesPromote.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/LegalizeTypesPromote.cpp
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ SDOperand DAGTypeLegalizer::PromoteResult_Constant(SDNode *N) {
   MVT VT = N->getValueType(0);
   // Zero extend things like i1, sign extend everything else.  It shouldn't
   // matter in theory which one we pick, but this tends to give better code?
-  unsigned Opc = VT != MVT::i1 ? ISD::SIGN_EXTEND : ISD::ZERO_EXTEND;
+  unsigned Opc = VT.isByteSized() ? ISD::SIGN_EXTEND : ISD::ZERO_EXTEND;
   SDOperand Result = DAG.getNode(Opc, TLI.getTypeToTransformTo(VT),
                                  SDOperand(N, 0));
   assert(isa<ConstantSDNode>(Result) && "Didn't constant fold ext?");
diff --git a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/TargetLowering.cpp b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/TargetLowering.cpp
index 81cdf46..fe752de 100644
--- a/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/TargetLowering.cpp
+++ b/lib/CodeGen/SelectionDAG/TargetLowering.cpp
@@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ void TargetLowering::computeRegisterProperties() {
   NumRegistersForVT[MVT::isVoid] = 0;
 
   // Find the largest integer register class.
-  unsigned LargestIntReg = MVT::i128;
+  unsigned LargestIntReg = MVT::LAST_INTEGER_VALUETYPE;
   for (; RegClassForVT[LargestIntReg] == 0; --LargestIntReg)
     assert(LargestIntReg != MVT::i1 && "No integer registers defined!");