From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IhusE-0008Ar-7n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:26:50 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IhusC-00088U-OW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:26:49 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhusC-00088J-L6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:26:48 -0400 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IhusC-0006vU-4u for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:26:48 -0400 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: Code fetch optimisation Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:26:42 +0100 References: <1192362267.9976.383.camel@rapid> <200710152342.08019.paul@codesourcery.com> <1192566444.9976.510.camel@rapid> In-Reply-To: <1192566444.9976.510.camel@rapid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200710162326.43496.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: "J. Mayer" > Well, we got the same behavior on PowerPC. What I was thinking of is > that if we fix the VLE problems, the fix, if done in a proper way, could > also allow benefit to RISC targets. What I don't know is; would we > really have a benefit not stopping translation on page boundaries ? [ I meant to say in my previous mail, but got cut during editing ] I suspect that we're going to want/need to break the TB to get the exception semantics right, so for RISC targets there's no point having TBs that span a page boundary. Paul