Re: [RFA] sh-sim loose ends

[Michael Snyder <msnyder@redhat.com>]

Joern Rennecke wrote:
>>Hmmm?  I thought 'L' was for registers, and 'MA' was for memory access.
>>This is the only instruction that modifies a gpr but doesn't call 'L'.
>>Figured it was an oversight.
> 
> 
> No, MA is for the memory *access conflict* between data access and
> instruction fetch for the non/unified cache SH[123], while L is for
> the memory access *latency* on SH[123].
> 
> And, of course, there is also no L for "mov <REG_M>,<REG_N>".
> 
> 
>>Actually I was just going for consistancy (everywhere else that
>>modifies nip uses SET_NIP).  I'll gladly drop this part of the
>>patch if you don't like it.
> 
> 
> Well, I don't like it because it adds more code unnecessarily, thus
> increasing the working set.
> And it isn't really inconsistent; SET_NIP is used when nip is changed
> for something other than linear instruction fetch, so that we know
> if we'll sooner hit a loop boundary or the end of memory.
> ppi_insn and the profile trap just do linear instruction fetch for
> larger instructions; sleep / trap 0xc3 re-fetches the same instruction
> again.

OK, I'll drop those.  I assume the others are OK?