ping? On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:49 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry, didn't immediate realize the review tool is not updated from email; > will > stick to the tool now. > > > On 2010/03/02 14:15:38, Erik Corry wrote: > >> The stuff from the new .h file can be moved into constants-arm.h. The >> stuff >> from the new .cc file can go either in the simulator or disassembler .cc >> file. >> > > > Done. > Also removed the bxxxx constants; replaced them with hex/Bxx for now: > consolidation of constants.arm.h, assembler-arm.h and assembler-thumb2.h > should > probably be a separate CL. > > > http://codereview.chromium.org/651029/diff/3020/4057 >> File src/arm/instr-thumb2.h (right): >> > > http://codereview.chromium.org/651029/diff/3020/4057#newcode229 >> src/arm/instr-thumb2.h:229: int imm_; >> On 2010/02/26 13:07:23, Erik Corry wrote: >> > The instruction needs to be a very lightweight object. This thing has >> 15 >> > fields, most of which will be unused in most instructions. Just >> > initializing > >> > this object is likely to cost you. >> > >> > I suggest that you leave instr0_ and instr1_ and make all the rest >> inlined >> > accessor functions. >> > > Having thought about this a bit more I can see that the irregularity of >> the T2 >> instruction set makes this a reasonable option. >> > > In the slightly longer run we would like to see the T2 and ARM simulators >> use >> the same overall structure. The easiest way to achieve this would be to >> move >> the ARM instruction decoder to use the same infrastructure. I don't feel >> that >> has to be a part of this first change list though. >> > > > > http://codereview.chromium.org/651029 > -- Stefan Haustein Google UK Limited Registered Office: Belgrave House, 76 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 9TQ; Registered in England Number: 3977902 -- v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
