From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34519 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OKZgK-0008OB-Fl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:23:41 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <rth@twiddle.net>) id 1OKZgF-0000dB-3m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:23:40 -0400
Received: from are.twiddle.net ([75.149.56.221]:37634)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <rth@twiddle.net>) id 1OKZgE-0000d3-Ny
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jun 2010 12:23:35 -0400
Message-ID: <4C092885.9040300@twiddle.net>
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2010 09:23:33 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-i386: fix decoding of negative 4-byte
	displacements
References: <4C08D2F3.6060007@redhat.com>
	<1275661653-16726-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1275661653-16726-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Igor Kovalenko <gor.v.kovalenko@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 06/04/2010 07:27 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Negative four byte displacements need to be sign-extended after
> c086b783eb7a578993d6d2ab62c4c2666800b63d.  Do so.

Acked-by: Richard Henderson  <rth@twiddle.net>


>         There are quite a few other ldl's to audit after the patch
>         (about 70 in target-*).  Any volunteers? :-)

I've looked over all the uses of ldl_code.  Thankfully 95% of them
are immediately stored into an explicit 32-bit variable.  I do not
see any other problematic uses of that particular identifier.


r~