From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58801)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1UjVk9-0005Ee-7L
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jun 2013 10:28:23 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1UjVk5-0004MF-Qj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Jun 2013 10:28:17 -0400
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51ACA7F0.5000904@twiddle.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 07:28:00 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20130602222452.1b0fdbd1@kryten> <20130602222723.1e006760@kryten>
In-Reply-To: <20130602222723.1e006760@kryten>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] tcg-ppc64: Fix RLDCL opcode
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, agraf@suse.de, aurelien@aurel32.net, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au

On 06/02/2013 05:27 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> The rldcl instruction doesn't have an sh field, so the minor opcode
> of 8 is actually 4 when using the XO30 macro.
> 
> Cc: qemu-stable@nongnu.org
> Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
> ---
> 
> Index: b/tcg/ppc64/tcg-target.c
> ===================================================================
> --- a/tcg/ppc64/tcg-target.c
> +++ b/tcg/ppc64/tcg-target.c
> @@ -357,7 +357,7 @@ static int tcg_target_const_match (tcg_t
>  #define RLDICL XO30(  0)
>  #define RLDICR XO30(  1)
>  #define RLDIMI XO30(  3)
> -#define RLDCL  XO30(  8)
> +#define RLDCL  XO30(  4)

Oops.

But that suggests then that we ought not be using XO30.
Or at least adding a comment.


r~