On 11/18/2013 11:55 PM, Michael Matz wrote: >> > I think we need to either explicitly convert the tcg_shift to a >> > TCGv_i32, or we need to use an open coded version of the rotr_i64 that >> > inserts at (32 - n) instead of (64 - n) >> > >> > What do you think? > I think converting tcg_shift might eventually lead to better generated > code (if tcg is optmizing enough, now or in the future, haven't checked).
Agreed. r~
