BitScanForwardNode: LongBits test failure

Andrew Haley aph at
Wed Nov 30 19:52:41 UTC 2016

On 30/11/16 19:14, Tom Rodriguez wrote:
> AArch64 seems to have it’s own version of numberOfTrailingZeros instead of using the default one.  The other uses of BitScanForwardNode are explicitly protected from 0.  That being said foldStamp should probably handle the case of 0 properly.  BitScanForwardNode is sort of x86 dependent which is why it has the weird specification.

Okay, thanks.  So, I could look at getting rid of AArch64's
numberOfTrailingZeros, but I don't think there is anything wrong

I can see that AMD64GraphBuilderPlugins has its own version of
numberOfTrailingZeros too; unless you are talking about something
else.  I can't see that AArch64 does anything significantly different
to AMD64.  If you can see that it does, I'd be grateful if you could
point me at the code.



More information about the graal-dev mailing list