This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [patches] Re: Patch: x86_64 disassembler support
- To: Jan Hubicka <jh at suse dot cz>
- Subject: Re: [patches] Re: Patch: x86_64 disassembler support
- From: Alan Modra <alan at linuxcare dot com dot au>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 11:30:28 +1100 (EST)
- cc: patches at x86-64 dot org, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> I still believe it makes sense to keep tables as similar as possible,
> but if you think otherwise, just let me know and I can remove the relevant
> bits.
It's OK. I know how easy it is to accidentally leave old patches in code,
which is why I was asking about the change.
> +static bfd_signed_vma
> +get32s ()
> +{
> + bfd_signed_vma x = 0;
> +
> + FETCH_DATA (the_info, codep + 4);
> + x = *codep++ & (bfd_signed_vma) 0xff;
> + x |= (*codep++ & (bfd_signed_vma) 0xff) << 8;
> + x |= (*codep++ & (bfd_signed_vma) 0xff) << 16;
> + x |= (*codep++ & (bfd_signed_vma) 0xff) << 24;
> +
> + if ((x & ~(((bfd_signed_vma) 2 << 31) - 1)) == 0)
The above line is redundant, isn't it?
> + x = (x ^ ((bfd_signed_vma) 1 << 31)) - ((bfd_signed_vma) 1 << 31);
If you've run the binutils testsuite, then this is OK to commit.
Alan
--
Linuxcare. Support for the Revolution.