On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 10:42 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 11:22:08PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > > I agree about using labels, but "bcl 20,31,foo" is not the same thing > > > as "bl foo". The former is a form of bl that doesn't perturb the link > > > stack and is therefore better for performance when you're not going to > > > do a matching blr later (not that performance is at all critical > > > here). > > > > If performance mattered I would have complained about the extra mfmsr. :-) > > > > I see that some other parts of the kernel are using that bcl instruction, > > but > > if it is actually worthwhile in those places, it'd be nice to at least > > stick > > it in a macro for readability... > > How is that going to help? It's just idiom; replacing it with some other > idiom only means people already used to the 20,31 thing (which is quite old > by now, btw.; 74xx days) will have to learn the new thing.
That's fine for people who are used to it (especially if it's the only number- based bc they routinely come across), but I had to look up what it meant. Simplified mnemonics exist for a reason. > Unless you can think of a nice short name that can even be made an extended > mnemonic? For a macro I was thinking "BL_NORET" but for a mnemonic it'd probably be shortened to something like "blnr". -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
