From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Sep 26 05:40:28 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0104516A4CE
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 26 Sep 2004 05:40:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4EEE43D31
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 26 Sep 2004 05:40:27 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (davidxu@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i8Q5eQJL049547
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Sun, 26 Sep 2004 05:40:27 GMT
	(envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org)
Message-ID: <41565673.7050504@freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 13:41:07 +0800
From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US;
	rv:1.7.1) Gecko/20040730
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Interesting code in exec_setregs
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 05:40:28 -0000

I found following code in  sys/i386/i386/machdep.c:
function exec_setregs:

 bzero((char *)regs, sizeof(struct trapframe));
 regs->tf_eip = entry;
 regs->tf_esp = stack;
 regs->tf_eflags = PSL_USER | (regs->tf_eflags & PSL_T);

the regs is cleared to zero, why do we bother to test it
again ? regs->tf_eflags & PSL_T  is useless code.

AMD64 also has this, I also found it in releng_4, why ?

David Xu