On 06/26/2018 05:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> + * TODO: The implementation so far could handle predicated merging movprfx.
>> + * The helper functions as written take an extra source register to
>> + * use in the operation, but the result is only written when predication
>> + * succeeds. For unpredicated movprfx, we need to rearrange the helpers
>> + * to allow the final write back to the destination to be unconditional.
>> + * For predicated zering movprfz, we need to rearrange the helpers to
>
> "zeroing". Should that be "movprfx" or is "movprfz" a thing? (the SVE
> spec doesn't mention it.)
Yes, typo for movprfx.
>
>> + * allow the final write back to zero inactives.
>> + *
>> + * In the meantime, just emit the moves.
>> + */
>> +
>> +static bool trans_MOVPRFX(DisasContext *s, arg_MOVPRFX *a, uint32_t insn)
>> +{
>> + return do_mov_z(s, a->rd, a->rn);
>> +}
>
> A bit confusing that do_mov_z() does the sve_access_check() for us
> but do_sel_z() and do_movz_zpz() do not...
Yes. I regret do_mov_z does the check, but that patch is already in mainline,
and fixing it up isn't a necessity or a priority.
r~
