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

[Cédric Le Goater]

On 9/29/23 10:00, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> 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?

This one I can respin. I agree with Michael that some consistency is
preferable. Preparing a v2 full of '_'.

Thanks,

C.