From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52751)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1XINlT-0007Fq-3s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 16:06:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1XINlI-0005mQ-Ix
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 16:06:19 -0400
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <53EE6825.5040706@twiddle.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:05:57 -1000
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1407785009-6538-1-git-send-email-tommusta@gmail.com>
	<1407785009-6538-4-git-send-email-tommusta@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1407785009-6538-4-git-send-email-tommusta@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/8] target-ppc: Bug Fix: rlwimi
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: Tom Musta <tommusta@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org
Cc: agraf@suse.de

On 08/11/2014 09:23 AM, Tom Musta wrote:
> Also fix the special case of MB=31 and ME=0 to copy the entire contents
> of the source GPR.

Err, that's not what you did.

>      if (likely(sh == 0 && mb == 0 && me == 31)) {
> +#if defined(TARGET_PPC64)
> +        tcg_gen_mov_i64(cpu_gpr[rA(ctx->opcode)], cpu_gpr[rS(ctx->opcode)]);
> +#else
>          tcg_gen_ext32u_tl(cpu_gpr[rA(ctx->opcode)], cpu_gpr[rS(ctx->opcode)]);
> +#endif

This is the reverse condition.  Which, true enough, should not be implemented
with ext32u for PPC64.  But a MOV isn't right either, it is

  deposit(ra, rs, 0, 32)

Which does point out that we should probably implement anything MB <= ME and SH
== 31 - ME with the deposit opcode.


r~