On 17.02.2018 00:40, Emilio G. Cota wrote:
> Notes:
>
> - Kept ctx.pc and ctx.next_pc; it would be very confusing
> to have ctx.base.pc_next and ctx.next_pc !
> Instead, just updated ctx.base.pc_next where relevant.
So we now have
ctx.pc
-> same as ctx.base.pc_next
-> points at the untrans
Notes:
- Kept ctx.pc and ctx.next_pc; it would be very confusing
to have ctx.base.pc_next and ctx.next_pc !
Instead, just updated ctx.base.pc_next where relevant.
- Did not convert num_insns and is_jmp, since the corresponding
code will go away in the next patch.
- Avoided a checkpatch err
