On 18/01/2016 11:51, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> The actual code in the function is
>> >
>> > default: VIXL_UNREACHABLE(); return 0;
>> >
>> > so this is obviously a false positive. Defining VIXL_DEBUG would cause
>> > VIXL_UNREACHABLE() to call abort(). Any opinion about whether/where to
>> > do so?
> Does defining it to call abort() result in unreachable-code warnings
> for the "return 0;" ?
I'm not sure, it would be minor though.
One issue I have found after posting is that I'm not sure whether bad
instructions (aka reserved encodings) are handled properly by libvixl.
See for example this:
case 'A': { // IAddSub.
VIXL_ASSERT(instr->ShiftAddSub() <= 1);
int64_t imm = instr->ImmAddSub() << (12 * instr->ShiftAddSub());
AppendToOutput("#0x%" PRIx64 " (%" PRId64 ")", imm, imm);
return 7;
}
where the '1x' encodings of bits 22:23 (marked as reserved in the ARMv8
ARM) would cause an abort as far as I can see.
Paolo
