https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=385408
--- Comment #8 from Julian Seward <jsew...@acm.org> ---
(In reply to Vadim Barkov from comment #6)
> Created attachment 108482 [details]
> Initial vector support for z13 (chapter 21)
This patch will need some further work before it is reviewable.
Right now it is so huge and difficult to follow that I have no
confidence in being able to review it properly.
Please:
* Divide it up into much smaller pieces, each of which can be reviewed
independently.
* Remove all whitespace changes. These just add noise and make the
reviewing process more difficult.
* Remove the numerous __inline__ annotations in guest_s390_toIR.c.
None of these functions are performance critical, and the compiler
can decide for itself what to inline.
* Try to reduce the size of the patch as much as possible. A few
small changes widely spaced is ideal. Right now, we have stuff
like this
-static void
-s390_format_RRF_UUFR(const HChar *(*irgen)(UChar m3, UChar m4, UChar r1,
- UChar r2),
- UChar m3, UChar m4, UChar r1, UChar r2)
+/* Write byte #6 of a vr to the guest state. */
+static __inline__ void
+put_vr_b6(UInt archreg, IRExpr *expr)
{
- const HChar *mnm = irgen(m3, m4, r1, r2);
+ vassert(typeOfIRExpr(irsb->tyenv, expr) == Ity_I8);
- if (UNLIKELY(vex_traceflags & VEX_TRACE_FE))
- s390_disasm(ENC5(MNM, FPR, UINT, GPR, UINT), mnm, r1, m3, r2, m4);
+ stmt(IRStmt_Put(vr_b6_offset(archreg), expr));
}
which is incomprehensible. Is put_vr_b6 a new function? A replacement
for s390_format_RRF_UUFR? A modified version of s390_format_RRF_UUFR?
It's impossible to tell.
* Verify with Andreas that your changes, at a high level, make sense
w.r.t. support of older hardware.
Thank you.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
