From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.171]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78104DE22A for ; Fri, 27 Jun 2008 05:43:22 +1000 (EST) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 24so160073wfg.15 for ; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:43:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2c0942db0806261243g52edd45eo11ded19bb1f24004@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:43:20 -0700 From: "Ray Lee" Sender: madrabbit@gmail.com To: monstr@seznam.cz Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/60] microblaze_v4: exception handling In-Reply-To: <4863EBD9.1010601@seznam.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 References: <1214483429-32360-1-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-3-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-4-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-5-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-6-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-7-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-8-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <1214483429-32360-9-git-send-email-monstr@seznam.cz> <2c0942db0806260935p51564a7et6517b39e9a6706dc@mail.gmail.com> <4863EBD9.1010601@seznam.cz> Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Michal Simek , vapier.adi@gmail.com, arnd@arndb.de, matthew@wil.cx, microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, will.newton@gmail.com, hpa@zytor.com, John.Linn@xilinx.com, john.williams@petalogix.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Michal Simek wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:29 AM, wrote: >>> +ex_sw: >>> + /* Get the destination register number into r5 */ >>> + lbui r5, r0, ex_reg_op; >>> + /* Form store_word jump table offset (sw_table + (8 * regnum)) */ >>> + la r6, r0, sw_table; >>> + add r5, r5, r5; >>> + add r5, r5, r5; >>> + add r5, r5, r5; >>> + add r5, r5, r6; >>> + bra r5; >> >> Possibly stupid question: This is part of the unaligned store word >> exception handler, yes? Shouldn't the above add's be addk's to >> preserve the state of the carry register pre/post store? > > I don't think that addk is important. I have some tests for exception, I want to > cover full exception handling. Okay. It doesn't match your other exception handlers, though, which is why I noticed it in the first place (they use addk).