linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
To: Tom Musta <tommusta@gmail.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: OE=1 Form Instructions Not Decoded Correctly
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 08:35:59 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130908223559.GA495@iris.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-hshaxuJBMCFquT7J50rjuDYWer_0i1=2QmnOKGAxx4n=FUw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 10:13:00AM -0500, Tom Musta wrote:
> To: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: [PATCH] powerpc: OE=1 Form Instructions Not Decoded Correctly
> From: Tom Musta <tommusta@gmail.com>
> 
> PowerISA uses instruction bit 21 to indicate that the overflow (OV) bit
> of the XER is to be set, as well as its corresponding sticky bit (SO).
> This patch addresses two defects in the implementation of the PowerISA
> single step code for this category of instructions:  (a) the OE=1 case
> is not correctly accounted for in the case statement for the extended
> opcode handling.  (b) the implementation is not setting XER[OV] and
> XER[SO].

Are you seeing any actual problems arising from the OE=1 instructions
not being emulated?  This code was designed primarily for emulating
instructions in the kernel, which is written in C, and the C compiler
doesn't emit OE=1 instructions -- or at least it didn't in the past.
So, does the impetus for this change come because the C compiler is
now emitting these instructions, or because this code is being used on
non-kernel instructions, or just for completeness?  Your patch
description needs to include answers to these kinds of questions.

Also, you need to indent your code correctly according to
Documentation/CodingStyle.

Paul.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-09-08 22:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-06 15:13 [PATCH] powerpc: OE=1 Form Instructions Not Decoded Correctly Tom Musta
2013-09-08 22:35 ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
2013-09-09 10:09   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-09-09 10:11   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-09-09 12:44     ` Tom Musta
2013-09-09 20:20       ` Tom Musta
2013-09-11  4:37         ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2013-09-10  0:25       ` Stephen Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130908223559.GA495@iris.ozlabs.ibm.com \
    --to=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=tommusta@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).