From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1O4Gv3-0008Ia-9A
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:07:29 -0400
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34510 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O4Gv0-0008GL-NX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:07:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1O4Guy-0007m0-HR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:07:26 -0400
Received: from mail-pw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.160.45]:60906)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1O4Guy-0007lo-Cu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:07:24 -0400
Received: by pwi6 with SMTP id 6so4074663pwi.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <s2ofb8d4f71004200955ma54d8162o226db4aa2365f484@mail.gmail.com>
References: <s2yfb8d4f71004200853tfdb3f912t214283beb9a9e2f9@mail.gmail.com>
	<h2mf43fc5581004200911sa12eec7fh39ed4ac667df4442@mail.gmail.com>
	<s2ofb8d4f71004200955ma54d8162o226db4aa2365f484@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:07:23 +0300
Message-ID: <p2if43fc5581004201007xb75a2d37y870149e6ef45fe4b@mail.gmail.com>
From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: sparc: potentially incorrect if dynamic npc?
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: Artyom Tarasenko <atar4qemu@googlemail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 4/20/10, Artyom Tarasenko <atar4qemu@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 2010/4/20 Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>:
>
> > On 4/20/10, Artyom Tarasenko <atar4qemu@googlemail.com> wrote:
>  >> /* XXX: potentially incorrect if dynamic npc */
>  >>  static void do_branch
>  >>
>  >>  There are few comments like this in target-sparc/translate.c .
>  >>  In what case is it incorrect?
>  >>
>  >>  Can do_branch functions be called with dynamic npc?
>  >
>  > Maybe, if there are two branches or jumps in a row. The last time I
>  > checked, at least for successive branches we do the correct thing.
>  > It's pretty obscure, no compiler will generate such sequences and
>  > nobody with asm skills either.
>
>
> Why not? That's how you can implement a very compact 'case'
>  operator in asm. It is used in OBP.
>
>  But you are right, this seems to work (at least with ss-5 and
>  ss-20 OBP).
>
>
>  > Another corner case that IIRC we don't handle is where a jump
>  > instruction is at the end of the page and its delay slot instruction
>  > is at next page.
>
>
> Do you mean that npc is dynamic in this case, or that if
>  npc is dynamic and the instruction is at the end of the page we have
>  a problem?

The problem is with code generation in general (delay slot instruction
gets translated effectively before the branch), could be related to
dynamic npc too but the branch could be bn or ba as well.