On 8/15/19 8:30 AM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > 15.08.2019. 04.13, "Jan Bobek" <jan.bo...@gmail.com > <mailto:jan.bo...@gmail.com>> је написао/ла: >> >> From: Richard Henderson <r...@twiddle.net <mailto:r...@twiddle.net>> >> >> Treat this the same as we already do for other rex bits. >> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <r...@twiddle.net <mailto:r...@twiddle.net>> >> --- >> target/i386/translate.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/target/i386/translate.c b/target/i386/translate.c >> index d74dbfd585..c0866c2797 100644 >> --- a/target/i386/translate.c >> +++ b/target/i386/translate.c >> @@ -44,11 +44,13 @@ >> #define REX_X(s) ((s)->rex_x) >> #define REX_B(s) ((s)->rex_b) >> #define REX_R(s) ((s)->rex_r) >> +#define REX_W(s) ((s)->rex_w) >> #else >> #define CODE64(s) 0 >> #define REX_X(s) 0 >> #define REX_B(s) 0 >> #define REX_R(s) 0 >> +#define REX_W(s) -1 > > The commit message says "treat rex_w the same as other rex bits". Why is then > REX_W() treated differently here?
"Treated the same" in terms of being referenced by a macro instead of a local variable. As for the -1, if you look at the rest of the patch you can clearly see it preserves existing behaviour. >> @@ -4503,6 +4504,7 @@ static target_ulong disas_insn(DisasContext *s, > CPUState *cpu) >> s->rex_x = 0; >> s->rex_b = 0; >> s->rex_r = 0; >> + s->rex_w = -1; >> s->x86_64_hregs = false; >> #endif >> s->rip_offset = 0; /* for relative ip address */ >> @@ -4514,7 +4516,6 @@ static target_ulong disas_insn(DisasContext *s, > CPUState *cpu) >> } >> >> prefixes = 0; >> - rex_w = -1; r~
