On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 04:57:39PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 12.02.2011, at 15:54, David Gibson wrote:
[snip]
> > + if (rb & (0x1000 - env->slb_nr))
>
> Braces...
Oops, yeah. These later patches in the series I haven't really
audited for coding style adequately yet. I'll fix these before the
next version.
[snip]
> > + return -1; /* 1T segment on MMU that doesn't support it */
> > +
> > + /* We stuff a copy of the B field into slb->esid to simplify
> > + * lookup later */
> > + slb->esid = (rb & (SLB_ESID_ESID | SLB_ESID_V)) |
> > + (rs >> SLB_VSID_SSIZE_SHIFT);
>
> Wouldn't it be easier to add another field?
Easier for what? The reason I put these bits in here is that the rest
of the things slb_lookup() needs to scan for are all in the esid
field, so putting B in there means slb_lookup() needs only one
comparison per-slot, per segment size.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
