[PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support

public inbox for gdb-patches@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

* [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support
@ 2014-12-24 13:36 Anthony Green
  2014-12-24 13:43 ` Joel Brobecker
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Green @ 2014-12-24 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gdb-patches


This patch adds support for the new mul.x and umul.x instructions for
the moxie simulator.  I'm checking this in.

Thanks,

AG


From sim/moxie/ChangeLog

2014-12-24  Anthony Green  <green@moxielogic.com>

	* interp.c (sim_resume): Add mul.x and umul.x instructions.


diff --git a/sim/moxie/interp.c b/sim/moxie/interp.c
index fdb6528..f57d166 100644
--- a/sim/moxie/interp.c
+++ b/sim/moxie/interp.c
@@ -622,8 +622,30 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (int) bv & 0xffff;
 	      }
 	      break;
-	    case 0x14: /* bad */
-	    case 0x15: /* bad */
+	    case 0x14: /* mul.x */
+	      {
+		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
+		int b = inst & 0xf;
+		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
+		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+		TRACE("mul.x");
+		signed long long r = 
+		  (signed long long) av * (signed long long) bv;
+		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = r >> 32;
+	      }
+	      break;
+	    case 0x15: /* umul.x */
+	      {
+		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
+		int b = inst & 0xf;
+		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
+		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+		TRACE("umul.x");
+		unsigned long long r = 
+		  (unsigned long long) av * (unsigned long long) bv;
+		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = r >> 32;
+	      }
+	      break;
 	    case 0x16: /* bad */
 	    case 0x17: /* bad */
 	    case 0x18: /* bad */

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support
  2014-12-24 13:36 [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support Anthony Green
@ 2014-12-24 13:43 ` Joel Brobecker
  2014-12-24 17:03   ` Doug Evans
  2014-12-25 13:26   ` Anthony Green
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2014-12-24 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Anthony Green; +Cc: gdb-patches

> 2014-12-24  Anthony Green  <green@moxielogic.com>
> 
> 	* interp.c (sim_resume): Add mul.x and umul.x instructions.
> 
> 
> diff --git a/sim/moxie/interp.c b/sim/moxie/interp.c
> index fdb6528..f57d166 100644
> --- a/sim/moxie/interp.c
> +++ b/sim/moxie/interp.c
> @@ -622,8 +622,30 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
>  		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (int) bv & 0xffff;
>  	      }
>  	      break;
> -	    case 0x14: /* bad */
> -	    case 0x15: /* bad */
> +	    case 0x14: /* mul.x */
> +	      {
> +		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
> +		int b = inst & 0xf;
> +		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
> +		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
> +		TRACE("mul.x");
> +		signed long long r = 
> +		  (signed long long) av * (signed long long) bv;
> +		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = r >> 32;

Can you add an empty line after the local variable declarations?
This is part of GDB's Coding Standard...

Also, you appear to have some code in between local variable
declarations, which is not allowed (non C90, I think). Can you fix?

> +	      }
> +	      break;
> +	    case 0x15: /* umul.x */
> +	      {
> +		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
> +		int b = inst & 0xf;
> +		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
> +		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
> +		TRACE("umul.x");
> +		unsigned long long r = 
> +		  (unsigned long long) av * (unsigned long long) bv;
> +		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = r >> 32;

Same here.

> +	      }
> +	      break;
>  	    case 0x16: /* bad */
>  	    case 0x17: /* bad */
>  	    case 0x18: /* bad */

Thank you,

-- 
Joel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support
  2014-12-24 13:43 ` Joel Brobecker
@ 2014-12-24 17:03   ` Doug Evans
  2014-12-24 17:12     ` Joel Brobecker
  2014-12-25 13:26   ` Anthony Green
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Doug Evans @ 2014-12-24 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: Anthony Green, gdb-patches

On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 5:43 AM, Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
>> 2014-12-24  Anthony Green  <green@moxielogic.com>
>> [...]
> Can you add an empty line after the local variable declarations?
> This is part of GDB's Coding Standard...
>
> Also, you appear to have some code in between local variable
> declarations, which is not allowed (non C90, I think). Can you fix?

Maybe as a "baby step" towards a more modern gdb, can we relax these
for the sim tree?

Just a suggestion, I don't have a strong opinion, other than lamenting
the ways in which gdb is held back.

[I can't remember the last time we had this discussion for the sim tree.
If it was in the recent past, apologies.  Let me know and I'll add
something to the wiki
to help prevent bringing this up again, at least in the near future.]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support
  2014-12-24 17:03   ` Doug Evans
@ 2014-12-24 17:12     ` Joel Brobecker
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2014-12-24 17:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Doug Evans; +Cc: Anthony Green, gdb-patches

> Maybe as a "baby step" towards a more modern gdb, can we relax these
> for the sim tree?
> 
> Just a suggestion, I don't have a strong opinion, other than lamenting
> the ways in which gdb is held back.

Personally speaking, I tend to prefer variables that are declared
all together, so I do not see this rule as "holding back" GDB.

-- 
Joel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support
  2014-12-24 13:43 ` Joel Brobecker
  2014-12-24 17:03   ` Doug Evans
@ 2014-12-25 13:26   ` Anthony Green
  2014-12-26 14:17     ` Joel Brobecker
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Green @ 2014-12-25 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb-patches

Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> writes:

> Can you add an empty line after the local variable declarations?
> This is part of GDB's Coding Standard...

Ok, I'm checking in the attached patch.  It adds a blank line after
every group of local variable declarations.

Thanks,

AG


2014-12-25  Anthony Green  <green@moxielogic.com>

	* interp.c (sim_resume): Whitespace changes to align with GDB
	coding standard.


 
 	* interp.c (sim_resume): Add mul.x and umul.x instructions.
diff --git a/sim/moxie/interp.c b/sim/moxie/interp.c
index fdd94af..6a72e41 100644
--- a/sim/moxie/interp.c
+++ b/sim/moxie/interp.c
@@ -366,6 +366,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		    int a = (inst >> 8) & 0xf;
 		    unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		    unsigned v = (inst & 0xff);
+
 		    TRACE("inc");
 		    cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av + v;
 		  }
@@ -375,6 +376,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		    int a = (inst >> 8) & 0xf;
 		    unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		    unsigned v = (inst & 0xff);
+
 		    TRACE("dec");
 		    cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av - v;
 		  }
@@ -383,6 +385,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		  {
 		    int a = (inst >> 8) & 0xf;
 		    unsigned v = (inst & 0xff);
+
 		    TRACE("gsr");
 		    cpu.asregs.regs[a] = cpu.asregs.sregs[v];
 		  }
@@ -391,6 +394,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		  {
 		    int a = (inst >> 8) & 0xf;
 		    unsigned v = (inst & 0xff);
+
 		    TRACE("ssr");
 		    cpu.asregs.sregs[v] = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		  }
@@ -416,6 +420,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	    case 0x01: /* ldi.l (immediate) */
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("ldi.l");
 		unsigned int val = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		cpu.asregs.regs[reg] = val;
@@ -426,6 +431,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int dest  = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int src = (inst ) & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("mov");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[dest] = cpu.asregs.regs[src];
 	      }
@@ -434,6 +440,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
  	      {
  		unsigned int fn = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
  		unsigned int sp = cpu.asregs.regs[1];
+
 		TRACE("jsra");
  		/* Save a slot for the static chain.  */
 		sp -= 4;
@@ -479,6 +486,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("add.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av + bv;
 	      }
@@ -488,6 +496,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int sp = cpu.asregs.regs[a] - 4;
+
 		TRACE("push");
 		wlat (scpu, opc, sp, cpu.asregs.regs[b]);
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = sp;
@@ -498,6 +507,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int sp = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
+
 		TRACE("pop");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[b] = rlat (scpu, opc, sp);
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = sp + 4;
@@ -507,6 +517,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("lda.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[reg] = rlat (scpu, opc, addr);
 		pc += 4;
@@ -516,6 +527,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("sta.l");
 		wlat (scpu, opc, addr, cpu.asregs.regs[reg]);
 		pc += 4;
@@ -526,6 +538,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int src  = inst & 0xf;
 		int dest = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int xv;
+
 		TRACE("ld.l");
 		xv = cpu.asregs.regs[src];
 		cpu.asregs.regs[dest] = rlat (scpu, opc, xv);
@@ -535,6 +548,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int dest = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int val  = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("st.l");
 		wlat (scpu, opc, cpu.asregs.regs[dest], cpu.asregs.regs[val]);
 	      }
@@ -544,6 +558,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("ldo.l");
 		addr += cpu.asregs.regs[b];
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = rlat (scpu, opc, addr);
@@ -555,6 +570,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("sto.l");
 		addr += cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		wlat (scpu, opc, addr, cpu.asregs.regs[b]);
@@ -570,7 +586,6 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int vb = cpu.asregs.regs[b]; 
 
 		TRACE("cmp");
-
 		if (va == vb)
 		  cc = CC_EQ;
 		else
@@ -591,6 +606,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		signed char bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("sex.b");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (int) bv;
 	      }
@@ -600,6 +616,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		signed short bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("sex.s");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (int) bv;
 	      }
@@ -609,6 +626,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		signed char bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("zex.b");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (int) bv & 0xff;
 	      }
@@ -618,6 +636,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		signed short bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("zex.s");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (int) bv & 0xffff;
 	      }
@@ -628,9 +647,10 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
-		TRACE("mul.x");
 		signed long long r = 
 		  (signed long long) av * (signed long long) bv;
+
+		TRACE("mul.x");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = r >> 32;
 	      }
 	      break;
@@ -640,9 +660,10 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
-		TRACE("umul.x");
 		unsigned long long r = 
 		  (unsigned long long) av * (unsigned long long) bv;
+
+		TRACE("umul.x");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = r >> 32;
 	      }
 	      break;
@@ -682,6 +703,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	    case 0x1a: /* jmpa */
 	      {
 		unsigned int tgt = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("jmpa");
 		pc = tgt - 2;
 	      }
@@ -689,8 +711,8 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	    case 0x1b: /* ldi.b (immediate) */
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
-
 		unsigned int val = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("ldi.b");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[reg] = val;
 		pc += 4;
@@ -701,6 +723,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int src  = inst & 0xf;
 		int dest = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int xv;
+
 		TRACE("ld.b");
 		xv = cpu.asregs.regs[src];
 		cpu.asregs.regs[dest] = rbat (scpu, opc, xv);
@@ -710,6 +733,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("lda.b");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[reg] = rbat (scpu, opc, addr);
 		pc += 4;
@@ -719,6 +743,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int dest = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int val  = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("st.b");
 		wbat (scpu, opc, cpu.asregs.regs[dest], cpu.asregs.regs[val]);
 	      }
@@ -727,6 +752,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("sta.b");
 		wbat (scpu, opc, addr, cpu.asregs.regs[reg]);
 		pc += 4;
@@ -737,6 +763,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 
 		unsigned int val = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("ldi.s");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[reg] = val;
 		pc += 4;
@@ -747,6 +774,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int src  = inst & 0xf;
 		int dest = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int xv;
+
 		TRACE("ld.s");
 		xv = cpu.asregs.regs[src];
 		cpu.asregs.regs[dest] = rsat (scpu, opc, xv);
@@ -756,6 +784,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("lda.s");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[reg] = rsat (scpu, opc, addr);
 		pc += 4;
@@ -765,6 +794,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int dest = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int val  = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("st.s");
 		wsat (scpu, opc, cpu.asregs.regs[dest], cpu.asregs.regs[val]);
 	      }
@@ -773,6 +803,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("sta.s");
 		wsat (scpu, opc, addr, cpu.asregs.regs[reg]);
 		pc += 4;
@@ -781,6 +812,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	    case 0x25: /* jmp */
 	      {
 		int reg = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("jmp");
 		pc = cpu.asregs.regs[reg] - 2;
 	      }
@@ -790,6 +822,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av, bv;
+
 		TRACE("and");
 		av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
@@ -802,6 +835,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("lshr");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (unsigned) ((unsigned) av >> bv);
 	      }
@@ -812,6 +846,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("ashl");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av << bv;
 	      }
@@ -822,6 +857,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("sub.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av - bv;
 	      }
@@ -831,6 +867,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a  = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b  = inst & 0xf;
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("neg");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = - bv;
 	      }
@@ -840,6 +877,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av, bv;
+
 		TRACE("or");
 		av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
@@ -851,6 +889,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("not");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = 0xffffffff ^ bv;
 	      }
@@ -861,6 +900,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b  = inst & 0xf;
 		int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("ashr");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av >> bv;
 	      }
@@ -870,6 +910,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av, bv;
+
 		TRACE("xor");
 		av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
@@ -882,6 +923,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("mul.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av * bv;
 	      }
@@ -889,6 +931,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 	    case 0x30: /* swi */
 	      {
 		unsigned int inum = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
+
 		TRACE("swi");
 		/* Set the special registers appropriately.  */
 		cpu.asregs.sregs[2] = 3; /* MOXIE_EX_SWI */
@@ -969,6 +1012,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("div.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av / bv;
 	      }
@@ -979,6 +1023,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("udiv.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (av / bv);
 	      }
@@ -989,6 +1034,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("mod.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = av % bv;
 	      }
@@ -999,6 +1045,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
 		unsigned int av = cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		unsigned int bv = cpu.asregs.regs[b];
+
 		TRACE("umod.l");
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = (av % bv);
 	      }
@@ -1013,6 +1060,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("ldo.b");
 		addr += cpu.asregs.regs[b];
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = rbat (scpu, opc, addr);
@@ -1024,6 +1072,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("sto.b");
 		addr += cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		wbat (scpu, opc, addr, cpu.asregs.regs[b]);
@@ -1035,6 +1084,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("ldo.s");
 		addr += cpu.asregs.regs[b];
 		cpu.asregs.regs[a] = rsat (scpu, opc, addr);
@@ -1046,6 +1096,7 @@ sim_resume (sd, step, siggnal)
 		unsigned int addr = EXTRACT_WORD(pc+2);
 		int a = (inst >> 4) & 0xf;
 		int b = inst & 0xf;
+
 		TRACE("sto.s");
 		addr += cpu.asregs.regs[a];
 		wsat (scpu, opc, addr, cpu.asregs.regs[b]);

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support
  2014-12-25 13:26   ` Anthony Green
@ 2014-12-26 14:17     ` Joel Brobecker
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2014-12-26 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Anthony Green; +Cc: gdb-patches

> > Can you add an empty line after the local variable declarations?
> > This is part of GDB's Coding Standard...
> 
> Ok, I'm checking in the attached patch.  It adds a blank line after
> every group of local variable declarations.

Wonderful, thank you!

-- 
Joel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2014-12-26 14:17 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-12-24 13:36 [PATCH, moxie, sim] Add mul.x and umul.x instruction support Anthony Green
2014-12-24 13:43 ` Joel Brobecker
2014-12-24 17:03   ` Doug Evans
2014-12-24 17:12     ` Joel Brobecker
2014-12-25 13:26   ` Anthony Green
2014-12-26 14:17     ` Joel Brobecker

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).