qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 25/28] target/s390x: Use cpu_*_mmuidx_ra instead of MMU_MODE*


From: David Hildenbrand
Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/28] target/s390x: Use cpu_*_mmuidx_ra instead of MMU_MODE*_SUFFIX
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 11:38:58 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2

On 12.12.19 05:00, Richard Henderson wrote:
> The generated functions aside from *_real are unused.
> The *_real functions have a couple of users in mem_helper.c;
> use *_mmuidx_ra instead, with MMU_REAL_IDX.
> 
> Cc: David Hildenbrand <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <address@hidden>
> ---
>  target/s390x/cpu.h        | 5 -----
>  target/s390x/mem_helper.c | 5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/target/s390x/cpu.h b/target/s390x/cpu.h
> index 17460ed7b3..2670728e8a 100644
> --- a/target/s390x/cpu.h
> +++ b/target/s390x/cpu.h
> @@ -36,11 +36,6 @@
>  
>  #define TARGET_INSN_START_EXTRA_WORDS 2
>  
> -#define MMU_MODE0_SUFFIX _primary
> -#define MMU_MODE1_SUFFIX _secondary
> -#define MMU_MODE2_SUFFIX _home
> -#define MMU_MODE3_SUFFIX _real
> -
>  #define MMU_USER_IDX 0
>  
>  #define S390_MAX_CPUS 248
> diff --git a/target/s390x/mem_helper.c b/target/s390x/mem_helper.c
> index 57ce17c252..d379be8418 100644
> --- a/target/s390x/mem_helper.c
> +++ b/target/s390x/mem_helper.c
> @@ -43,6 +43,11 @@
>  #define HELPER_LOG(x...)
>  #endif
>  
> +#define cpu_ldl_real_ra(e, p, r)    cpu_ldl_mmuidx_ra(e, p, MMU_REAL_IDX, r)
> +#define cpu_ldq_real_ra(e, p, r)    cpu_ldq_mmuidx_ra(e, p, MMU_REAL_IDX, r)
> +#define cpu_stl_real_ra(e, p, v, r) cpu_stl_mmuidx_ra(e, p, v, MMU_REAL_IDX, 
> r)
> +#define cpu_stq_real_ra(e, p, v, r) cpu_stq_mmuidx_ra(e, p, v, MMU_REAL_IDX, 
> r)
> +

I'd prefer to fixup all callers and not have these "looks like core TCG
functions", but anyhow

Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <address@hidden>

I would have thought we would have more of these _primary/_secondary ...
accesses, but I guess we removed them over the time.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]