From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JPJuO-0002k7-Mf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:52:28 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JPJuL-0002hz-So for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:52:28 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JPJuL-0002hq-Lb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:52:25 -0500 Received: from mail.sysgo.com ([62.8.134.5]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JPJuL-0001CA-7S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:52:25 -0500 Received: from donald.sysgo.com (unknown [172.20.1.30]) by mail.sysgo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68F51E4003 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:52:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from mag-lap.sysgo.com (mag-lap.sysgo.com [172.22.7.12]) by donald.sysgo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB272E54A1 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:52:23 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:52:22 +0100 (CET) From: Marius Groeger Sender: mag@sysgo.com Subject: Re: [PATCH][Qemu-devel] Single stepping for PPC broken! In-Reply-To: <20080213134406.GA19391@caradoc.them.org> Message-ID: References: <200802111722.50517.rob@landley.net> <20080213134406.GA19391@caradoc.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 09:46:44AM +0100, Marius Groeger wrote: > > if ((tb->pc & TARGET_PAGE_MASK) == (dest & TARGET_PAGE_MASK) && > > !ctx->singlestep_enabled) { > > .. > > } else { > > gen_set_T1(dest); > > #if defined(TARGET_PPC64) > > if (ctx->sf_mode) > > gen_op_b_T1_64(); > > else > > #endif > > gen_op_b_T1(); > > if (ctx->singlestep_enabled) > > gen_op_debug() > > } > > > > It seems to me that the second if (ctx->singlestep_enabled) is > > rendundant. > > No, if you've gone to a different page without single step then you > don't need the debug trap. Hm, so you mean betweeen the first "if .. !ctx->singlestep_enabled" and the second one in the evaluation of ctx->singlestep_enabled changes? What I meant is simply that the "else" clause already implies that ctx->singlestep_enabled is true. Regards Marius -- Marius Groeger SYSGO AG Embedded and Real-Time Software Voice: +49 6136 9948 0 FAX: +49 6136 9948 10 www.sysgo.com | www.elinos.com | www.osek.de | www.pikeos.com