Re: [PATCH] target/ppc: Rename variables to avoid local variable shadowing in VUPKPX

[Markus Armbruster]

Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> writes:

> On 9/23/23 10:25, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> 23.09.2023 10:12, Cédric Le Goater:
>> 
>>> --- a/target/ppc/int_helper.c
>>> +++ b/target/ppc/int_helper.c
>>> @@ -2022,11 +2022,11 @@ void helper_vsum4ubs(CPUPPCState *env, ppc_avr_t 
>>> *r, ppc_avr_t *a, ppc_avr_t *b)
>>>           for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(r->u32); i++) {                      \
>>>               uint16_t e = b->u16[hi ? i : i + 4];                        \
>>>               uint8_t a = (e >> 15) ? 0xff : 0;                           \
>>> -            uint8_t r = (e >> 10) & 0x1f;                               \
>>> +            uint8_t _r = (e >> 10) & 0x1f;                              \
>>>               uint8_t g = (e >> 5) & 0x1f;                                \
>>> -            uint8_t b = e & 0x1f;                                       \
>>> +            uint8_t _b = e & 0x1f;                                      \
>> I'd suggest to rename all of them here to have the same pattern.  Maybe.. :)
>
> or maybe use the field names from the ISA : VRT,VRA,VRB ?

Should I expect a respin?

If not, anyone ready to give an R-by as is?