This will allow for support for `I128` values everywhere, and `I64`
values on 32-bit targets (e.g., ARM32 and x86-32). It does not alter the
machine backends to build such support; it just adds the framework for
the MachInst backends to *reason* about a `Value` residing in more than
one register.
the missing memory behavior was always a silly thing, that we generate a
function for wasmtime which is Result<_, Trap> we can just Err(Trap)
when the memory export is missing.
On AArch64, the zero register (xzr) and the stack pointer (xsp) are
alternately named by the same index `31` in machine code depending on
context. In particular, in the reg-reg-immediate ALU instruction form,
add/subtract will use the stack pointer, not the zero register, if index
31 is given for the first (register) source arg.
In a few places, we were emitting subtract instructions with the zero
register as an argument and a reg/immediate as the second argument. When
an immediate could be incorporated directly (we have the `iconst`
definition visible), this would result in incorrect code being
generated.
This issue was found in `ineg` and in the sequence for vector
right-shifts.
Reported by Ian Cullinan; thanks!
Previously, `select` and `brz`/`brnz` instructions, when given a `b1`
boolean argument, would test whether that boolean argument was nonzero,
rather than whether its LSB was nonzero. Since our invariant for mapping
CLIF state to machine state is that bits beyond the width of a value are
undefined, the proper lowering is to test only the LSB.
(aarch64 does not have the same issue because its `Extend` pseudoinst
already properly handles masking of b1 values when a zero-extend is
requested, as it is for select/brz/brnz.)
Found by Nathan Ringo on Zulip [1] (thanks!).
[1]
https://bytecodealliance.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/217117-cranelift/topic/bnot.20on.20b1s
if inheriting rights are for files (not subdirs) then this is incorrect.
if inheriting rights are for subdirs too, then we need to change the
implementation.
