From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39423 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OJtU4-0007IF-UD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:20:17 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <igor.v.kovalenko@gmail.com>) id 1OJtU3-0008Fp-I6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:20:12 -0400
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]:19496)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <igor.v.kovalenko@gmail.com>) id 1OJtU3-0008FL-AZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 15:20:11 -0400
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 16so100126fgg.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:20:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4C0660E6.20703@twiddle.net>
References: <20100601200434.5908.19495.stgit@skyserv>
	<20100601201227.5908.12931.stgit@skyserv>
	<4C057114.7000308@twiddle.net>
	<AANLkTikim46GZTwUwTsjGpoO1oggibP70bLO4hdMDtTb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C0660E6.20703@twiddle.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 23:20:10 +0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTimX-Pdwt2JALudzqvgMi_umUhPmOrjsvaGG4AKD@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/8] sparc64: fix missing address masking
From: Igor Kovalenko <igor.v.kovalenko@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> wrote:
> On 06/01/2010 09:29 PM, Igor Kovalenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net> wro=
te:
>>> On 06/01/2010 01:12 PM, Igor V. Kovalenko wrote:
>>>> + =A0 =A0if ((env->pstate & PS_AM) && is_translating_asi(asi)) {
>>>> + =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0addr &=3D 0xffffffffULL;
>>>> + =A0 =A0}
>>>
>>> I suggest that these be written instead as
>>>
>>> =A0if (is_translating_asi(asi)) {
>>> =A0 =A0addr =3D address_mask(addr);
>>> =A0}
>>>
>>> That should allow you to remove some of the ifdefs.
>>
>> All address masking is done for sparc64 target only, sparc32 does not
>> have the notion of translating asi.
>
> Of course I know that.
>
>> I think it's better to do debug printf macro trick ...
>
> ... with no evidence. =A0The compiler is happy to optimize away
> the entire if statement without having to resort to macros.
>
>> ... then but I see no real benefit at the moment.
>
> Avoiding ifdefs isn't a benefit?

Reading through the code you will have false evidence of possible
extra steps taken by hardware we emulate.
Looking at sparcv8 docs it is clear that similar steps are done there
as well so I'll drop ifdefs at call sites and redo the patch.

--=20
Kind regards,
Igor V. Kovalenko