Re: [RFC] PPC: Skip call to __eabi in main()

[Luis Machado <luisgpm@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

Hi Kevin,

Sorry it took a while to reply.

On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 17:22 -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> +#define BL_MASK 0xfc000001

We have a very similar mask used for displaced stepping called
BRANCH_MASK (0xfc000000). It doesn't care about the LK bit though, its
purpose is just to check for a generic branch instruction.

Maybe we should rename BL_MASK to something else incorporating the
notion that we expect a LK bit? Or maybe doing the check for the LK bit
manually in the code and using BL_MASK as is.

> +#define BL_INSTRUCTION 0x48000001

Similarly, we also have B_INSN (0x48000000), lacking the LK bit.

> +#define BL_DISPLACEMENT_MASK 0x03fffffc

Should we make the naming more generic (B_LI_MASK maybe?) as the
displacement field is common to a variety of I-form branch instructions?
Just a suggestion, doesn't need to change if you don't feel it clarifies
things.

Regards,
Luis