From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53393)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1WzReT-0006ub-2o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:24:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1WzReN-0008IL-2z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:24:49 -0400
Received: from mail-qa0-x22e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22e]:47570)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1WzReM-0008IG-UF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:24:42 -0400
Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id i13so291314qae.19
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 07:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53A98A25.1030900@twiddle.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 07:24:37 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1402499992-64851-1-git-send-email-leon.alrae@imgtec.com>
	<1402499992-64851-15-git-send-email-leon.alrae@imgtec.com>
	<20140620205028.GB13921@ohm.rr44.fr> <53A949D5.3040805@imgtec.com>
	<CAFEAcA8hQ412R0wxZWGFYuqgDJLMOrQhBTXeaKxNC3gDoscdXg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8hQ412R0wxZWGFYuqgDJLMOrQhBTXeaKxNC3gDoscdXg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 14/22] target-mips: add Addressing and
 PC-relative instructions
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: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Leon Alrae <leon.alrae@imgtec.com>
Cc: yongbok.kim@imgtec.com, cristian.cuna@imgtec.com, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

On 06/24/2014 03:00 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 24 June 2014 10:50, Leon Alrae <leon.alrae@imgtec.com> wrote:
>> On 20/06/2014 21:50, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>>> I do wonder if we shouldn't use sextract32() instead of open coding that
>>> now that it is available:
>>>
>>>                offset = sextract32(ctx->opcode, 0, 19) << 3;
>>
>> This looks better, thanks for the suggestion (but since the offset's
>> size is 18, third argument will be 18, not 19).
> 
> This is undefined behaviour in C because of the shift into
> the sign bit. Better to shift first and then signextend:
> 
>     offset = sextract32(ctx->opcode << 3, 0, 21);

Not true.  Because we know from the extract that the value has 13 copies of the
sign bit.  Shifting by 3 isn't going to cause problems.  It's shifting a
*different* bit into the sign position that's (one's compliment) undefined.


r~

PS: Honestly, all these compilers/sanitizers should grow a "No One's
Compliment" switch to disable all the stupid stuff.