From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52723) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THMAU-0007nm-3P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:02:50 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THMAQ-0007d6-2B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:02:49 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.220.45]:41023) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THMAP-0007d0-Ry for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:02:45 -0400 Received: by padfb10 with SMTP id fb10so1717289pad.4 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Richard Henderson Message-ID: <5064CD02.1070005@twiddle.net> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:02:42 -0700 From: Richard Henderson MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1348766113-18373-1-git-send-email-aurelien@aurel32.net> <1348766113-18373-12-git-send-email-aurelien@aurel32.net> <5064AB5E.2010006@twiddle.net> <20120927203436.GN20151@ohm.aurel32.net> In-Reply-To: <20120927203436.GN20151@ohm.aurel32.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 11/13] tcg: sync globals for pure helpers instead of saving them List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Aurelien Jarno Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 09/27/2012 01:34 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> (1) Helper may read globals. Sometimes indirectly via exception. >> Implies that globals must be synced, but may remain in REG/CONST state. > > I actually do wonder if we shouldn't use a different flag for "may > trigger exception", even if we end-up handling it the same way as "may > read globals". I am not sure it would be clear without knowledge of the > QEMU internals that a function triggering exceptions should be flagged > as "read globals". I agree it is better to have a "may trigger exception" flag if for nothing else besides documentation. > Given the default is READG | WRITEG, it would be difficult to do that > unless we negate the flags. Actually NOWRITEG, NOREADG, NOSIDE might be > a good way to go, and is more consistent that by default nothing should > be implied. Sure. r~