From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58502 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PF93r-00065D-Ge for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:29:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PF93q-0006BW-I1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:29:47 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]:33597) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PF93q-0006BA-Fa for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 12:29:46 -0500 Received: by qyk1 with SMTP id 1so4494136qyk.4 for ; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 09:29:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Artyom Tarasenko Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 18:22:39 +0100 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [Qemu-devel] sparc32 "bneg,a" bug? List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel , Blue Swirl Can it be that bneg,a branches unconditionally, or annuls unconditionally? 0xf0071520: subcc %g3, %g2, %g3 => 0xf0071524: bneg,a 0xf007152c 0xf0071528: clr %g3 0xf007152c: st %g3, [ %i0 + 0x58 ] (gdb) info registers g3 psr g3 0x18 24 psr 0x4000ae7 [ #0 #1 #2 ET PS S #9 #11 #26 ] (gdb) nexti 0xf007152c in ?? () 0xf0071528 is supposed to be executed. Or it a gdb stub bug? -- Regards, Artyom Tarasenko solaris/sparc under qemu blog: http://tyom.blogspot.com/