On 4/22/15 05:31, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 21 April 2015 at 22:23, Chen Gang <xili_gchen_5...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> On 4/22/15 05:15, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> will work in place of both of the above (and does this CPU >>> really only have two kinds of compare-immediate? Some of the >>> case labels suggest not, so it would be better to just implement >>> all the compare-immediates together in one patch.) >>> >>> You can probably use a function to do the sub-opcode-to-TCGCond >>> lookup too. >>> >>> Having dozens of two line functions that all look incredibly >>> similar is a really strong sign that you haven't taken >>> advantage of the commonality between them. CPU instruction >>> sets are usually pretty regular if they're well designed and >>> the resulting translate.c should also look pretty regular. >>> >> >> I guess what you said is correct, but at present, I did not think of all >> gen_cmp* (but it should really be done at last). >> >> So for me, at present, we can leave it as current implementation (Add >> FIXME comment). And at last (when almost finish all opcode decoding), I >> shall rewrite it again. > > If you rewrite it all at the end then we get twice the code > review work to do. Please just do it right the first time. >
OK, I shall try. Thanks. -- Chen Gang Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed
