On 8/3/21 6:14 AM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> These functions are much closer to the softmmu helper
> functions, in that they take the complete MemOpIdx,
> and from that they may enforce required alignment.
>
> The previous cpu_ldst.h functions did not have alignment info,
> and so did not enforce it. Retain this by adding MO_UNALN to
> the MemOp that we create in calling the new functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <[email protected]>
> ---
> docs/devel/loads-stores.rst | 52 ++++-
> include/exec/cpu_ldst.h | 245 ++++++++--------------
> accel/tcg/cputlb.c | 392 ++++++++++++------------------------
> accel/tcg/user-exec.c | 390 +++++++++++++++--------------------
> accel/tcg/ldst_common.c.inc | 307 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 722 insertions(+), 664 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 accel/tcg/ldst_common.c.inc
> Function names follow the pattern:
>
> +load: ``cpu_ld{size}{end}_mmu(env, ptr, oi, retaddr)``
> +
> +store: ``cpu_st{size}{end}_mmu(env, ptr, val, oi, retaddr)``
> +
> +``size``
> + - ``b`` : 8 bits
> + - ``w`` : 16 bits
> + - ``l`` : 32 bits
> + - ``q`` : 64 bits
kinda unrelated to this patch, but what would be the pattern
for 128 bits? ``o`` for octoword?
> +
> +``end``
> + - (empty) : for target endian, or 8 bit sizes
> + - ``_be`` : big endian
> + - ``_le`` : little endian
> +
> +Regexes for git grep:
> + - ``\<cpu_ld[bwlq](_[bl]e)\?_mmu\>``
> + - ``\<cpu_st[bwlq](_[bl]e)\?_mmu\>``
