On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Jia Liu <pro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Max,
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Max Filippov <jcmvb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Jia Liu <pro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Add OpenRISC instruction tanslation routines.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jia Liu <pro...@gmail.com>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> + case 0x0009:
>>> + switch (op1) {
>>> + case 0x03: /* l.div */
>>> + LOG_DIS("l.div r%d, r%d, r%d\n", rd, ra, rb);
>>> + {
>>> + int lab0 = gen_new_label();
>>> + int lab1 = gen_new_label();
>>> + int lab2 = gen_new_label();
>>> + int lab3 = gen_new_label();
>>> + TCGv_i32 sr_ove = tcg_temp_local_new_i32();
>>> + if (rb == 0) {
>>> + tcg_gen_ori_tl(cpu_sr, cpu_sr, (SR_OV | SR_CY));
>>> + tcg_gen_andi_tl(sr_ove, cpu_sr, SR_OVE);
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_NE, sr_ove, SR_OVE, lab0);
>>> + gen_exception(dc, EXCP_RANGE);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab0);
>>> + } else {
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_EQ, cpu_R[rb],
>>> + 0x00000000, lab1);
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_NE, cpu_R[ra],
>>> + 0x80000000, lab2);
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_NE, cpu_R[rb],
>>> + 0xffffffff, lab2);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab1);
>>> + tcg_gen_ori_tl(cpu_sr, cpu_sr, (SR_OV | SR_CY));
>>> + tcg_gen_andi_tl(sr_ove, cpu_sr, SR_OVE);
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_EQ, sr_ove, SR_OVE, lab3);
>>
>> You used to have
>>
>> tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_NE, sr_ove, SR_OVE, lab2)
>>
>> here in previous series, why do you change NE to EQ?
>>
>
> According to the OpenRISC Arch Manual.
> OV: Overflow flag
> 0 No overflow occured during last arithmetic operation
> 1 Overflow occured during last arithmetic operation
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> OVE:Overflow flag Exception
> 0 Overflow flag does not cause an exception
> 1 Overflow flag causes range exception
>
> It will raise a exception, when sr_ove is 1. 0, not.
Right.
> If there was not a exception, that is, sr_ove is 0, we should use NE
> and jump to lab2, compute safety.
No, sr_ove does not reflect whether there was an exception or not,
it controls whether we want an exception on overflow or not.
> but if there was a exception, that is, sr_ove is 1, we have to jump to
> lab3 to avoid crash QEMU.
> Keep it NE will run the test fine, too. I think maybe EQ is better.
It's strange, with my testcase you should get an exception inside
the guest if you put EQ here. Did you observe it?
> How it to be in your eyes?
Condition code was all correct; when we didn't want an exception
on overflow, i.e. sr_ove is not equal to SR_OVE, you jumped to exit,
otherwise you raised an exception. You should keep NE here.
>>> + gen_exception(dc, EXCP_RANGE);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab2);
>>> + tcg_gen_div_tl(cpu_R[rd], cpu_R[ra], cpu_R[rb]);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab3);
>>> + }
>>> + tcg_temp_free_i32(sr_ove);
>>> + }
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + default:
>>> + gen_illegal_exception(dc);
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case 0x000a:
>>> + switch (op1) {
>>> + case 0x03: /* l.divu */
>>> + LOG_DIS("l.divu r%d, r%d, r%d\n", rd, ra, rb);
>>> + {
>>> + int lab0 = gen_new_label();
>>> + int lab1 = gen_new_label();
>>> + int lab2 = gen_new_label();
>>> + TCGv_i32 sr_ove = tcg_temp_local_new_i32();
>>> + if (rb == 0) {
>>> + tcg_gen_ori_tl(cpu_sr, cpu_sr, (SR_OV | SR_CY));
>>> + tcg_gen_andi_tl(sr_ove, cpu_sr, SR_OVE);
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_NE, sr_ove, SR_OVE, lab0);
>>> + gen_exception(dc, EXCP_RANGE);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab0);
>>> + } else {
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_NE, cpu_R[rb],
>>> + 0x00000000, lab1);
>>> + tcg_gen_ori_tl(cpu_sr, cpu_sr, (SR_OV | SR_CY));
>>> + tcg_gen_andi_tl(sr_ove, cpu_sr, SR_OVE);
>>> + tcg_gen_brcondi_tl(TCG_COND_EQ, sr_ove, SR_OVE, lab2);
>>
>> Same here.
>>
>>> + gen_exception(dc, EXCP_RANGE);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab1);
>>> + tcg_gen_divu_tl(cpu_R[rd], cpu_R[ra], cpu_R[rb]);
>>> + gen_set_label(lab2);
>>> + }
>>> + tcg_temp_free_i32(sr_ove);
>>> + }
>>> + break;
--
Thanks.
-- Max
