From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:42743) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8vuo-0000FJ-Kj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:19:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8vuj-0003iD-T4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:19:18 -0400 Received: from mail-wy0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173]:59192) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8vuj-0003i1-KZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:19:13 -0400 Received: by wyh22 with SMTP id 22so126370wyh.4 for ; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:19:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Richard Henderson Message-ID: <4E833AEA.8080508@twiddle.net> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:19:06 -0700 From: Richard Henderson MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4E8312D7.4080403@siemens.com> <4E832E88.6080909@twiddle.net> <4E83304F.4010008@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <4E83304F.4010008@siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] tcg-i386: Introduce specific deposit helpers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Blue Swirl , qemu-devel , Aurelien Jarno On 09/28/2011 07:33 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> I don't particularly care for the 3 different opcodes. Perhaps >> we'd be better off with an inline predicate for when the deposit >> opcode is "valid"? > > We still need to dispatch at tcg generation time which variant is valid. Or what do you have in mind? Yes, but we'd know at tcg generation time that it *does* fit one of the few patterns you point out. The predicate would be used in e.g. tcg_gen_deposit_i32 to select either INDEX_op_deposit_i32 or the and/shift/and/or fallback. r~