Le 05/09/2022 à 22:43, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
Hi!
On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:15:07PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
quoted
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
+ if ((insn & 3) == 1) {
+ *type = INSN_CALL;
+ *immediate = insn & 0x3fffffc;
+ if (*immediate & 0x2000000)
+ *immediate -= 0x4000000;
+ }
+ break;
+ }
Does this handle AA=1 correctly at all? That is valid both with and
without relocations, just like AA=0. Same for AA=1 LK=0 btw.
If you only handle AA=0, the code should explicitly test for that.
The code does test for AA=0 LK=1 with the if statement there?
Yes, but that is not what I said :-)
It may be fine to not *handle* AA=1 at all, but the code should at least
scream bloody murder when it encounters it anyway :-)
By the way, I proposed a cleanup patch that handles it, see
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/patch/ebe11b73d1015a17034a2c4bedf093fa57f5d29f.1662032631.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu/
Christophe