Confusion: setup-semantics? PC not updated? Immediate operands?

[Ben Elliston]

H-P,

>>>>> "Hans-Peter" == Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com> writes:

  Hans-Peter> This when generating that big GCC-specific C switch
  Hans-Peter> <arch>-switch.c, which seems generated from sim-cpu.scm.  From
  Hans-Peter> what little scheme I understand (I'm blissfully naive), it seems
  Hans-Peter> only sid-cpu.scm, not sim-cpu.scm, supports setup-semantics.
  Hans-Peter> I'd use it for purposes similar to that of arm.cpu.
  Hans-Peter> Should it work?

I think you are correct.  The setup-semantics work might need to be
back-ported to sim-cpu.scm.  Much of the work is completely analogous;
it shouldn't be too difficult.

arm.cpu was the first port to use setup-semantics and back then, we
were doing early SID component development.  The ARM was our first
hw-cpu-* component, which would explain why setup-semantics is only
supported by sid-cpu.scm.

Ben