Re: [PATCH 03/11] accel/tcg: Modify tlb_*() to use CPUState

[Anton Johansson]

> On 9/12/23 08:34, Anton Johansson wrote:
> > Changes tlb_*() functions to take CPUState instead of CPUArchState, as
> > they don't require the full CPUArchState. This makes it easier to
> > decouple target-(in)dependent code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Johansson <anjo@rev.ng>
> > ---
> >   include/exec/cpu_ldst.h |   8 +-
> >   accel/tcg/cputlb.c      | 218 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> >   2 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/exec/cpu_ldst.h b/include/exec/cpu_ldst.h
> > index da10ba1433..8d168f76ce 100644
> > --- a/include/exec/cpu_ldst.h
> > +++ b/include/exec/cpu_ldst.h
> > @@ -361,19 +361,19 @@ static inline uint64_t tlb_addr_write(const 
> > CPUTLBEntry *entry)
> >   }
> >     /* Find the TLB index corresponding to the mmu_idx + address 
> > pair.  */
> > -static inline uintptr_t tlb_index(CPUArchState *env, uintptr_t mmu_idx,
> > +static inline uintptr_t tlb_index(CPUState *cpu, uintptr_t mmu_idx,
> >                                     vaddr addr)
> >   {
> > -    uintptr_t size_mask = env_tlb(env)->f[mmu_idx].mask >> 
> > CPU_TLB_ENTRY_BITS;
> > +    uintptr_t size_mask = cpu_tlb(cpu)->f[mmu_idx].mask >> 
> > CPU_TLB_ENTRY_BITS;
>
> No, I think this is a bad idea, because it bakes an extra memory 
> indirection into very fundamental routines.
>
> If we change anything here, we should pass in CPUTLB.
Yeah, you're right. I'll pass CPUTLB instead, or do you have another idea?

Thanks a lot for the input!

--
Anton Johansson,
rev.ng Labs Srl.