Just saw a last comment on a few words' case.
I will fix it.


http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc
File src/arm/assembler-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode432
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:432: return ((instr & ~RdMask) ==
kPushRegPattern);
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
RdMask is a constant. We should keep the kRdMask name for it.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode491
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:491: if ((Instruction::ConditionField(instr) ==
special_condition) &&
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
kSpecialCondition?

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode1462
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:1462: } else if
(Instruction::RdValue(mem_write_instr)
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Not your change, but could you format this like the other cases
please?

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode1470
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:1470: Instruction::RdValue(ldr_instr)) ||
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Align with Instruction::RdValue on the line above.

Wasn't exactly sure of the best indentation .
I hope this works.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode1599
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:1599: svc(stop_code + code, cond);
It is. Renamed.
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Is stop_code a constant? In that case it should be named as one:
kStopCode.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h
File src/arm/constants-arm.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode119
src/arm/constants-arm.h:119: no_condition = -1,
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
kNoCondition


http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml?showone=Enumerator_Names#Enumerator_Names

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode121
src/arm/constants-arm.h:121: eq =  0 << 28,                 // Z set
       Equal.
I leave it then. I think it'll also fit better with the rest of the code
and other archs.
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
These really should be capitalized, but in order to not have to change
everything I'm OK with leaving these.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode137
src/arm/constants-arm.h:137: special_condition = 15 << 28,  // Special
condition (refer to section A3.2.1).
Initially named all these to be coherent with lower-case conditions.
I'll use kCamelCase for all non standard conditions.
If we use kNoCondition I think
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
kSpecialCondition?

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode138
src/arm/constants-arm.h:138: number_of_conditions = 16,
Same. Done.
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
kNumberOfConditions?

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode256
src/arm/constants-arm.h:256: // Instruction bit masks.
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Prefix all of these with a 'k': kCondMask, kALUMask, ...

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/constants-arm.h#newcode296
src/arm/constants-arm.h:296: number_of_shifts = 4
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
kNumberOfShifts

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc
File src/arm/disasm-arm.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode235
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:235: ", %s ", shift_names[shift_index]);
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Identation.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode248
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:248: "#%d", imm);
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Indentation.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode257
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:257: ", %s #%d",
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Indentation.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode304
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:304: "%d - 0x%x",
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Indentation.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode309
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:309: "%d",
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Indentation.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode405
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:405: ", #%d", imm);
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Indentation. And more occurrences below.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/disasm-arm.cc#newcode1358
src/arm/disasm-arm.cc:1358: namespace v8i = v8::internal;
Replaced v8i with v8::internal.

About the disasm namespace, I can't just remove it on ARM. The disasm
namespace is used for all architectures, and there are 2 Disassembler
classes (disasm.h and disassembler.h) distinguished through this
namespace.

On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
I don't like the v8i shorthand. Remove and just use v8::internal as
before.

Alternatively, is there any reason to actually have the disassembler
support in
a different namespace. Why not have that in the v8::internal namespace
as well?

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/simulator-arm.h
File src/arm/simulator-arm.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/diff/21001/src/arm/simulator-arm.h#newcode355
src/arm/simulator-arm.h:355: } }  // namespace v8::internal
On 2011/01/24 11:45:03, Mads Ager wrote:
Remove lines 355-359? Leaving and re-entering the same namespace.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/6274009/

--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev

Reply via email to