On 06/28/2017 06:49 AM, Lluís Vilanova wrote:
+ /* We want to stop the TB if the next insn starts in a new page,
+ * or if it spans between this page and the next. This means that
+ * if we're looking at the last halfword in the page we need to
+ * see if it's a 16-bit Thumb insn (which will fit in this TB)
+ * or a 32-bit Thumb insn (which won't).
+ * This is to avoid generating a silly TB with a single 16-bit insn
+ * in it at the end of this page (which would execute correctly
+ * but isn't very efficient).
+ */
+ return DISAS_PAGE_CROSS;
Any reason to introduce a new name as opposed to TOO_MANY? As far as I can
tell they're the same....
+ if (dc->ss_active && !dc->pstate_ss) {
+ /* Singlestep state is Active-pending.
+ * If we're in this state at the start of a TB then either
+ * a) we just took an exception to an EL which is being debugged
+ * and this is the first insn in the exception handler
+ * b) debug exceptions were masked and we just unmasked them
+ * without changing EL (eg by clearing PSTATE.D)
+ * In either case we're going to take a swstep exception in the
+ * "did not step an insn" case, and so the syndrome ISV and EX
+ * bits should be zero.
+ */
+ assert(dc->base.num_insns == 1);
+ gen_exception(EXCP_UDEF, syn_swstep(dc->ss_same_el, 0, 0),
+ default_exception_el(dc));
+ dc->base.is_jmp = DISAS_SKIP;
This is surely DISAS_EXC -- see gen_step_complete_exception.
Why introduce a new name?
r~
