From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54591)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Yrvqk-0005FX-EX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 18:06:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Yrvqg-0008UE-CA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 18:06:58 -0400
Received: from mail-qg0-x22d.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22d]:33548)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Yrvqg-0008U6-7R
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 May 2015 18:06:54 -0400
Received: by qgdy78 with SMTP id y78so75593217qgd.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 11 May 2015 15:06:53 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <555127F8.1030604@twiddle.net>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 15:06:48 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BLU436-SMTP25541B8B575D093A94C69DFB9DC0@phx.gbl>
	<BLU437-SMTP59B35F884A72A991334DBB9DC0@phx.gbl>
	<5550D270.4020202@twiddle.net>
	<BLU436-SMTP193FEF00A249CC306A24945B9DB0@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU436-SMTP193FEF00A249CC306A24945B9DB0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/10 v10] target-tilegx/opcode_tilegx.h:
 Modify it to fit qemu using
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Chen Gang <xili_gchen_5257@hotmail.com>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@ezchip.com>
Cc: "walt@tilera.com" <walt@tilera.com>, Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 05/11/2015 02:06 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 5/12/15 00:01, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 05/10/2015 03:42 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>> -static __inline unsigned int
>>> +static inline uint8_t
>>>  get_BFEnd_X0(tilegx_bundle_bits num)
>>
>> Do not change these casts to uint8_t.  It's unnecessary churn.
>>
> 
> For me, it is enough to return uint8_t, and the caller really treats it
> as uint8_t. So for the function declaration, uint8_t is more precise
> than unsigned int for return type.

I don't want to argue about this anymore.  Drop all the uint8_t and uint16_t.


r~