From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IY0jy-0003TN-86
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:41:22 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IY0jw-0003SA-AH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:41:21 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IY0jw-0003S7-5F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:41:20 -0400
Received: from bangui.magic.fr ([195.154.194.245])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <l_indien@magic.fr>) id 1IY0ju-00020K-Dt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2007 10:41:19 -0400
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SVM support]
From: Jocelyn Mayer <l_indien@magic.fr>
In-Reply-To: <00FC6422-CB9E-4C8D-9B27-C77A072A1234@suse.de>
References: <1190148856.14938.247.camel@rapid>
	<1190156750.14938.295.camel@rapid>
	<200709190028.52730.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<00FC6422-CB9E-4C8D-9B27-C77A072A1234@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:39:30 +0200
Message-Id: <1190212770.12194.16.camel@jma4.dev.netgem.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: l_indien@magic.fr, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 12:56 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2007, at 1:28 AM, Paul Brook wrote:
> 
> >>>> Ok, I will try to shift the intercepts in an uint_64 flags variable
> >>>> in the TB.
> >>
> >> OK, great. Having 64 bits may also help for additional (ie future...)
> >> features in PowerPC 64 emulation.
> >
> > Maybe worth letting the target say whether it needs 32 or 64-bit  
> > flags.
> > The flag lookup is likely to be on a hot path.
> >
> > Paul
> 
> here comes the patch.

The patch looks correct to me, I'm just wondering why a cast to 32 bits
is needed in mips code ?

I may be wrong, but it seems to me that TB flags are only used to be
compared in tb_find_fast and tb_find_slow, which are not a very fast
path (we come here when we cannot jump directly to the next tb and are
not in the most time critical code) then we can afford adding a few asm
instructions (I would say max 2 ?) to replace a 32 bits comparison with
a 64 bits one. My feeling is that the performance loss here won't be
sensible, but that may need to be proved.