From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44171)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <thomas.hanson@linaro.org>) id 1bru8J-0002jW-9a
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 17:53:48 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <thomas.hanson@linaro.org>) id 1bru8E-0001nK-7T
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 17:53:46 -0400
Received: from mail-pa0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::234]:33214)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <thomas.hanson@linaro.org>) id 1bru8D-0001n5-Fu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 17:53:42 -0400
Received: by mail-pa0-x234.google.com with SMTP id cd13so491160pac.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 05 Oct 2016 14:53:41 -0700 (PDT)
References: <1474047287-145701-1-git-send-email-thomas.hanson@linaro.org>
	<1474047287-145701-3-git-send-email-thomas.hanson@linaro.org>
	<CAFEAcA-1iKNnThbVwfoG7oNjACNP9rfk2zEp015xQ2gc-gO_Xw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Tom Hanson <thomas.hanson@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <57F57641.3090104@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 15:53:05 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA-1iKNnThbVwfoG7oNjACNP9rfk2zEp015xQ2gc-gO_Xw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] target-arm: Code changes to implement
 overwrite of tag field on PC load
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, grant.likely@hpe.com, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>

On 09/29/2016 07:24 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 16 September 2016 at 10:34, Thomas Hanson <thomas.hanson@linaro.org> wrote:
...
>> diff --git a/target-arm/translate-a64.c b/target-arm/translate-a64.c
>> index f5e29d2..4d6f951 100644
...
>> @@ -176,6 +177,58 @@ void gen_a64_set_pc_im(uint64_t val)
>>      tcg_gen_movi_i64(cpu_pc, val);
>>  }
>>
>> +void gen_a64_set_pc_reg(DisasContext *s, unsigned int rn)
> 
> I think it would be better to take a TCGv_i64 here rather than
> unsigned int rn (ie have the caller do the cpu_reg(s, rn)).
> (You probably don't need that prototype of cpu_reg() above if
> you do this, though that's not why it's better.)
> 
Why would this be better? 

To me, the caller has a register number and wants that register used to load 
the PC.  So, it passes in the register number.  

The fact that gen_a64_set_pc_reg() needs to convert that into a TCGv_i64 is
an implementation detail that should be encapsulated/hidden from the caller.

If the desire is to eliminate the multiple cpu_reg() calls inside of 
gen_a64_set_pc_reg() then that mapping could be done at the top of the 
function before the outer if().