On Tue, 9 Feb 2016, Richard Henderson wrote:

> > So to be correct + efficient, it should only put the nop in if the next
> > generated instruction is a CTI. I imagine that would be a bit messy /
> > fragile, but maybe doable? I haven't looked too deeply.
> 
> Ouch, I didn't notice this about these insns.
> 
> I suppose this might be rare enough that it's still worth thinking about.  Off
> the top of my head I can't think of any way to save extra state, but perhaps
> just looking back at the previous insn's major opcode is enough when emitting
> any forbidden insn.

 FWIW I think this is a reasonable approach, applying to the regular MIPS 
ISA where the size of the instruction word is fixed so you can look at the 
preceding instruction in a reproducible manner.  And in the microMIPSr6 
ISA there are no forbidden slots, so no issue there in the first place.

  Maciej

Reply via email to