From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42008 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pn4gE-0003iJ-ES
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 02:41:39 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Pn4gD-0004RI-CS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 02:41:38 -0500
Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:61835)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Pn4gD-0004RE-4h
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 02:41:37 -0500
Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18so6490285wwi.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 23:41:36 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D52452C.3050008@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 08:41:32 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1294716228-9299-1-git-send-email-rth@twiddle.net>	<1294716228-9299-6-git-send-email-rth@twiddle.net>	<20110125122749.GA19736@edde.se.axis.com>	<20110131083322.GA17924@volta.aurel32.net>
	<4D5185DA.3050105@twiddle.net>
In-Reply-To: <4D5185DA.3050105@twiddle.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 5/7] tcg-i386: Implement deposit operation.
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Cc: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>, agraf@suse.de, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 02/08/2011 07:05 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> (Which is probably a mistake from a translator point of view -- there's
> no reason we can't emulate 16-bit operations with 32-bit operations given
> that the high bits are ignorable.)

Not really, you never know if the guest is going to use a 66 prefix on 
the next instruction.

Paolo