From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39258)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Yzt0w-0001iu-4M
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 16:42:23 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Yzt0s-0003nv-2i
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 16:42:22 -0400
Received: from mail-qk0-x229.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::229]:33179)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1Yzt0r-0003np-To
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 16:42:18 -0400
Received: by qkhg32 with SMTP id g32so108299780qkh.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <556E1525.9020302@twiddle.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 13:42:13 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1433193897-24110-1-git-send-email-aurelien@aurel32.net>
	<1433193897-24110-10-git-send-email-aurelien@aurel32.net>
	<556DE2D7.5000005@twiddle.net> <20150602190534.GD26129@aurel32.net>
In-Reply-To: <20150602190534.GD26129@aurel32.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 09/13] target-s390x: implement TRANSLATE
	EXTENDED instruction
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: Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>

On 06/02/2015 12:05 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> But why don't we just pass and return (most) of the data to the helper?  Like
>>
>>   C(0xb2a5, TRE,     RRE,   Z,   0, r2, r1_P, 0, tre, 0)
>>
>>   potential_page_fault(s);
>>   gen_helper_tre(o->out, cpu_env, o->out, o->out2, o->in2);
>>   return_low128(o->out2);
>>   set_cc_static(s);
> 
> My point was that we need to pass 4 values (reg0, r1, r1+1 and r2) and
> return 3 values (r1, r1+1 and cc), so it's probably better to pass all
> of them the same way. It's the strategy chosen for other similar
> instructions (e.g mvcl), except for cc.
> 
> I'll change that in the next version.

The reg0 and cc data is at a fixed location, and are
therefore more amenable to passing implicitly.

It's r1, r1+1, and r2 that are in varying locations,
and therefore you either have to pass their register
number or their contents.

For mvcl, there are 5 return values, so we're pretty
much stuck passing register numbers.


r~