[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: target/hppa: be,n nullifying first insn at branch target?
From: |
Sven Schnelle |
Subject: |
Re: target/hppa: be,n nullifying first insn at branch target? |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:52:54 +0100 |
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> writes:
> On 3/25/24 09:33, Sven Schnelle wrote:
>> diff --git a/target/hppa/translate.c b/target/hppa/translate.c
>> index 7546a5f5a2..56c68a7cbe 100644
>> --- a/target/hppa/translate.c
>> +++ b/target/hppa/translate.c
>> @@ -3847,7 +3849,7 @@ static bool trans_be(DisasContext *ctx, arg_be *a)
>> copy_iaoq_entry(ctx, cpu_gr[31], ctx->iaoq_n, ctx->iaoq_n_var);
>> tcg_gen_mov_i64(cpu_sr[0], cpu_iasq_b);
>> }
>> - if (a->n && use_nullify_skip(ctx)) {
>> + if (0 && a->n && use_nullify_skip(ctx)) {
>> copy_iaoq_entry(ctx, cpu_iaoq_f, -1, tmp);
>> tcg_gen_addi_i64(tmp, tmp, 4);
>> copy_iaoq_entry(ctx, cpu_iaoq_b, -1, tmp);
>> So i think the problem is caused by this optimization. Does this
>> ring a
>> bell? Debugging this is rather hard, alone the logfile above is 6GB in
>> size...
>
> The problem is a missing
>
> nullify_set(ctx, 0)
>
> within this block.
>
> I have patches queued to reorg the IAQ handling, which I hope will fix
> the problem Sven saw with spaces. It would fix this as a consequence
> of other unification. But I think it's a bit too big for 9.0.
Thanks Richard. Let me know if you want me to test patches.