On 24 April 2013 08:32, li guang <lig.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> I think even others want to use something like you said,
> it should not 'cs_base', or, it's a bad name.
Yes, this is why I said "has a less than helpful name".
>>
>> >> > --- a/target-sparc/cpu.h
>> >> > +++ b/target-sparc/cpu.h
>> >> > @@ -715,7 +715,7 @@ trap_state* cpu_tsptr(CPUSPARCState* env);
>> >> > #define TB_FLAG_AM_ENABLED (1 << 5)
>> >> >
>> >> > static inline void cpu_get_tb_cpu_state(CPUSPARCState *env,
>> >> > target_ulong *pc,
>> >> > - target_ulong *cs_base, int
>> >> > *flags)
>> >> > + int *flags)
>> >> > {
>> >> > *pc = env->pc;
>> >> > *cs_base = env->npc;
>> You clearly have a problem with your compile and test
>> process then, because it is clear from the patch that
>> you've removed the cs_base argument from this function
>> but the function still has a use of 'cs_base' in it.
>
> ???, sorry, where do I miss 'cs_base' removing?
Last quoted line of source: "*cs_base = env->npc".
-- PMM
