From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48192)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aLBWU-0006it-7k
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:15:14 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aLBWR-0001BK-Ez
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:15:14 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]:33207)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aLBWR-0001B4-7h
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:15:11 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-x234.google.com with SMTP id 123so56338952wmz.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:15:11 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
References: <569CBCB1.5040004@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA_gpdv=zRLaXMRFvXkog7dRt0umjJz=npTL7Zz58fAKuA@mail.gmail.com>
	<569CC526.4060607@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA-WkvVe4oHb5bnP-XuNDfKWqqt32x6FLZ=Evt6_71ksqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <569D017C.70000@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:15:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA-WkvVe4oHb5bnP-XuNDfKWqqt32x6FLZ=Evt6_71ksqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] defining VIXL_DEBUG?
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>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>



On 18/01/2016 12:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> >
>> > where the '1x' encodings of bits 22:23 (marked as reserved in the ARMv8
>> > ARM) would cause an abort as far as I can see.
> Isn't this handled by  Decoder::DecodeAddSubImmediate(), which checks
> bit 23?

Yes, that's right.

Paolo

> In any case if we're worried it would be easy to set up a trivial
> test loop that just feeds all 2^32 integers to the disassembler.