On 4/28/25 3:07 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 4/28/25 15:00, Pierrick Bouvier wrote:
On 4/28/25 1:10 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
diff --git a/include/accel/tcg/cpu-ops.h b/include/accel/tcg/cpu-ops.h
index f5e5746976..8dbe79ea7c 100644
--- a/include/accel/tcg/cpu-ops.h
+++ b/include/accel/tcg/cpu-ops.h
@@ -18,8 +18,13 @@
#include "exec/vaddr.h"
#include "tcg/tcg-mo.h"
-void cpu_get_tb_cpu_state(CPUArchState *env, vaddr *pc,
- uint64_t *cs_base, uint32_t *flags);
+struct TCGTBCPUState {
+ vaddr pc;
+ uint32_t flags;
+ uint64_t flags2;
Could it be named cs_base instead?
flags2 is a little bit generic.
Of course flags2 is generic -- it's only cs_base for x86.
It seems to be named the same for other architectures as well,
so it's wrong for all other arch too?
My point is that:
tb_gen_code(cpu, s.pc, s.flags2, s.flags, cflags);
is error prone, and it's easy to swap flags and flags2 by mistake.
I don't mind the name, but something more distinct would help.
r~
