Re: [PATCH 08/60] microblaze_v4: exception handling
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +ex_sw: + /* Get the destination register number into r5 */ + lbuir5, r0, ex_reg_op; + /* Form store_word jump table offset (sw_table + (8 * regnum)) */ + la r6, r0, sw_table; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r6; + bra r5; Possibly stupid question: This is part of the unaligned store word exception handler, yes? Shouldn't the above add's be addk's to preserve the state of the carry register pre/post store? I don't think that addk is important. I have some tests for exception, I want to cover full exception handling. M ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 08/60] microblaze_v4: exception handling
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Michal Simek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +ex_sw: + /* Get the destination register number into r5 */ + lbuir5, r0, ex_reg_op; + /* Form store_word jump table offset (sw_table + (8 * regnum)) */ + la r6, r0, sw_table; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r6; + bra r5; Possibly stupid question: This is part of the unaligned store word exception handler, yes? Shouldn't the above add's be addk's to preserve the state of the carry register pre/post store? I don't think that addk is important. I have some tests for exception, I want to cover full exception handling. Okay. It doesn't match your other exception handlers, though, which is why I noticed it in the first place (they use addk). ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 08/60] microblaze_v4: exception handling
Ray Lee napsal(a): On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:19 PM, Michal Simek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 5:29 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: +ex_sw: + /* Get the destination register number into r5 */ + lbuir5, r0, ex_reg_op; + /* Form store_word jump table offset (sw_table + (8 * regnum)) */ + la r6, r0, sw_table; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r5; + add r5, r5, r6; + bra r5; Possibly stupid question: This is part of the unaligned store word exception handler, yes? Shouldn't the above add's be addk's to preserve the state of the carry register pre/post store? I don't think that addk is important. I have some tests for exception, I want to cover full exception handling. Okay. It doesn't match your other exception handlers, though, which is why I noticed it in the first place (they use addk). thanks for notice. I'll keep in my mind when I test it. M ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
