Hi Sandipan,
> + {
> + .descr = "RA = LONG_MIN | INT_MIN, RB =
> LONG_MIN | INT_MIN",
> + .instr = PPC_INST_ADDC | ___PPC_RT(20) |
> ___PPC_RA(21) | ___PPC_RB(22),
> + .regs =
> + {
> + .gpr[21] = LONG_MIN | (uint) INT_MIN,
> + .gpr[22] = LONG_MIN | (uint) INT_MIN,
> + }
> + }
I don't know what this bit pattern is supposed to represent - is it
supposed to be the smallest 32bit integer and the smallest 64bit
integer 8000000080000000 - so you test 32 and 64 bit overflow at the
same time?
For the series:
Tested-by: Daniel Axtens <d...@axtens.net> # Power8 LE
I notice the output is quite verbose, and doesn't include a line when it
starts:
[ 0.826181] Running code patching self-tests ...
[ 0.826607] Running feature fixup self-tests ...
[ 0.826615] nop : R0 = LONG_MAX
[PASS]
[ 0.826617] add : RA = LONG_MIN, RB = LONG_MIN
[PASS]
Maybe it would be good to include a line saying "Running single-step
emulation self-tests" and perhaps by default on printing when there is a
failure.
Finally, I think you might be able to squash patches 1 and 2 and patches
4 and 5, but that's just my personal preference.
Regards,
Daniel
