On 19/11/2021 06:18, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/18/21 2:25 PM, Lucas Mateus Castro (alqotel) wrote:
+ if ((fpscr & FP_VXSOFT) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXSOFT;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_OX) && (fpscr & FP_OE)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_OX;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_UX) && (fpscr & FP_UE)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_UX;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_XX) && (fpscr & FP_XE)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_XX;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_ZX) && (fpscr & FP_ZE)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_ZX;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_VXSNAN) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXSNAN;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_VXISI) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXISI;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_VXIDI) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXIDI;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_VXZDZ) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXZDZ;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_VXIMZ) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXIMZ;
+ } else if ((fpscr & FP_VXVC) && (fpscr_ve != 0)) {
+ error = POWERPC_EXCP_FP_VXVC;
+ }
Is there a defined order for these in the manual? I couldn't find it
quickly if so. If
there is no defined order, I think you should test VE only once.
I also couldn't find a defined order, so I chose to prioritize VXSOFT
then go by ascending order of the bit number. In the v3 I'll move VXSOFT
with the others invalid operation bits to check VE once then.
Drop the use of fpscr_ve and use fpscr & FP_VE instead. (I think these
hidden uses of *env
are evil and should be banished, but that's a bit of a job.)
You could say
} else {
return;
}
+
+ if (error) {
and then remove this test.
Ok, I'll do these in v3.
The rest of it looks good.
r~
--
Lucas Mateus M. Araujo e Castro
Instituto de Pesquisas ELDORADO
<https://www.eldorado.org.br/?utm_campaign=assinatura_de_e-mail&utm_medium=email&utm_source=RD+Station>
Departamento Computação Embarcada
Estagiario
Aviso Legal - Disclaimer <https://www.eldorado.org.br/disclaimer.html>
