[MIPS] New pattern in validator to detect jumps/branches in delay slots.

[MIPS] New pattern in validator to detect jumps/branches in delay slots.

New pattern and tests have been added to detect if a branch or jump is placed in
delay slot. We need to avoid these situations since behaviour under these
circumstances is 'unpredicted'.

The commit queue is not working for NaCl at the moment, so we are committing
with:
NOTRY=true
However, we have run a try job manually, and it passed fine.

BUG= http://code.google.com/p/nativeclient/issues/detail?id=2275
TEST= pnacl/build.sh misc-tools

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/native_client?view=rev&revision=10007

[petarj, 2012-10-09 16:10:04]

This is a follow-up from discussion on http://codereview.chromium.org/11016003/.

[Please use jfb - chromium.org, 2012-10-09 16:44:31]

http://codereview.chromium.org/11090024/diff/1/src/trusted/validator_mips/tes...
File src/trusted/validator_mips/testdata/test_unpredicted.S (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11090024/diff/1/src/trusted/validator_mips/tes...
src/trusted/validator_mips/testdata/test_unpredicted.S:27: end_of_code:
Add test for jr in b's slot, and b in jr's slot.

[petarj, 2012-10-10 12:12:14]

Done. Patch set with extended test cases added.

http://codereview.chromium.org/11090024/diff/1/src/trusted/validator_mips/tes...
File src/trusted/validator_mips/testdata/test_unpredicted.S (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/11090024/diff/1/src/trusted/validator_mips/tes...
src/trusted/validator_mips/testdata/test_unpredicted.S:27: end_of_code:
On 2012/10/09 16:44:32, jfb wrote:
> Add test for jr in b's slot, and b in jr's slot.

Done.

[JF, 2012-10-10 14:11:55]

lgtm

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-10 14:33:31]

No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
Even if an LGTM may have been provided, it was from a non-committer or
a lowly provisional committer, _not_ a full super star committer.
See http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/become-a-committer
Note that this has nothing to do with OWNERS files.

[petarj, 2012-10-11 10:51:38]

On 2012/10/10 14:33:31, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.

Mark?

[Mark Seaborn, 2012-10-16 01:12:39]

On 2012/10/11 10:51:38, petarj wrote:
> On 2012/10/10 14:33:31, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> > No LGTM from a valid reviewer yet. Only full committers are accepted.
> 
> Mark?

Rubber-stamp LGTM since JF reviewed this.

Mark

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-16 08:57:53]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://nativeclient-status.appspot.com/cq/petarj@mips.com/11090024/13002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-16 10:00:57]

The commit queue went berserk retrying too often for a
seemingly flaky test. Builder is nacl-arm_opt_panda, revision is 10005, job name
was 11090024-13002 (previous was lost) (previous was lost) (previous was lost)
(previous was lost).

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-16 10:07:14]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://nativeclient-status.appspot.com/cq/petarj@mips.com/11090024/13002

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-10-16 10:07:22]

Change committed as 10007