Re: [linuxsh-dev] kernel debugging

[Jeremy S. <js...@mv...>]

NIIBE Yutaka wrote:

> I have a comment on the expressions calculating PC.  It's OK, but
> it would be good if we can improve the implementation.
>
>  > +                                    regs->pc += ((signed char)(instruction&0x00FF))*2 + 4;
> [...]
>  > +                                    regs->pc += ((signed char)(instruction&0x00FF))*2 + 4;
> [...]
>  > +                    regs->pc += (((signed short)(instruction<<4))>>3) + 4;
> [...]
>  > +                    regs->pc += (((signed short)(instruction<<4))>>3) + 4;
>
> We want something like "ext.b" or "ext.w" (of SuperH assembler) here.
> In general, it's not good practice using type coercion to do the
> calculation.

Not sure I understand... would you prefer explicit asm statements rather
than forcing the ext type using casts?

--Jeremy