From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MU4cZ-0006iz-Ag
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:10:31 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MU4cS-0006gY-4j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:10:29 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37174 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MU4cR-0006gT-Uu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:10:24 -0400
Received: from mtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]:5717)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MU4cR-0007qp-34
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:10:23 -0400
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:10:06 +0100
From: Stuart Brady <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] RFC: TCG constant propagation.
Message-ID: <20090723201006.GA29483@miranda.arrow>
References: <E1MTGSg-0007wd-QX@lists.gnu.org>
	<5b31733c0907230208o7374ad68uf6e4438a5c5a41d5@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5b31733c0907230208o7374ad68uf6e4438a5c5a41d5@mail.gmail.com>
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: Filip Navara <filip.navara@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

+            dest = args[0];
+            src = args[1];
+            if (const_temps[src]) {
+                const_temps[dest] = 1;
+                dest_val = ~temp_values[src];
+                *opc_ptr = INDEX_op_movi_i32;

Hrm... is it really right to be setting *opc_ptr = INDEX_op_movi_i32
even for 64-bit ops?  Applies to both 'not'[0] and the binary ops...

Cheers,
-- 
Stuart Brady

[0] BTW, the #ifdefs will need shuffling if other unary ops (e.g. neg)
are wanted... it's trivial, but I can't see a reason not to do it. :-)