From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lu6MQ-0006Tx-HP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:45:10 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lu6MP-0006Te-M5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:45:10 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=50677 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lu6MP-0006Tb-GP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:45:09 -0400 Received: from hall.aurel32.net ([88.191.82.174]:47230) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Lu6MO-0003B7-Et for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:45:09 -0400 Received: from volta.aurel32.net ([2002:52e8:2fb:1:21e:8cff:feb0:693b]) by hall.aurel32.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lu6MK-0004oz-Bp for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:45:04 +0200 Received: from aurel32 by volta.aurel32.net with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Lu6MJ-0001hQ-NC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:45:03 +0200 Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:45:03 +0200 From: Aurelien Jarno Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [7094] target-mips: don't map zero register as a TCG global Message-ID: <20090415144503.GC13794@volta.aurel32.net> References: <20090412213544.GA12200@miranda.arrow> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090412213544.GA12200@miranda.arrow> 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 On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 10:35:45PM +0100, Stuart Brady wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 06:43:20PM +0000, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > target-mips: don't map zero register as a TCG global > > Just wondering, would it make some small sense to initialise cpu_gpr[0] > to something? For instance: > > TCGV_UNUSED(cpu_gpr[0]); > I did the change mostly to detect wrong use of this register (like it was before my optimisations commits, hopefully only in read mode). You are right that to correctly detect it, we should use this macro. This is fixed in the SVN. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net