> The if is redundant, since that will have been done in
cpu_get_tb_cpu_state while assigning pm_enabled.
I totally agree here, however I tried to do explicit checks, so this
functionality is available only if a special option is supplied.
But if you think that's too much and I could do just mov(dst, src) in case
PM is disabled, I'd gladly fix that.
> I suggest you drop apply_pointer_masking and just use
gen_pm_adjust_address.
Sure, will do.
Thanks!
ср, 14 окт. 2020 г. в 22:24, Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org
>:
> On 10/14/20 10:01 AM, Alexey Baturo wrote:
> > + if (has_ext(ctx, RVJ)) {
> > + src1 = apply_pointer_masking(ctx, src1);
> > + }
>
> The if is redundant, since that will have been done in cpu_get_tb_cpu_state
> while assigning pm_enabled.
>
> The test for pm_enabled is in gen_pm_adjust_address.
>
> The final thing is that the API for apply_pointer_masking is misleading.
> Here,
> it appears as if you are allocating a new temporary and assigning it to
> src1.
> Which is not the case.
>
> I suggest you drop apply_pointer_masking and just use
> gen_pm_adjust_address.
>
>
> r~
>
