LDNP/STNP#60
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 49 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (31)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds LDNP and STNP AArch64 instruction types, constructors, encoding rules, public exports, and tests for register combinations and immediate offset boundaries. Shared pair-offset macro generation is generalized to support both instructions. ChangesLDNP and STNP pair instructions
Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Suggested labels: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
harm/src/instructions/ldst/macros.rs (1)
493-547: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick winDoc comments hardcode "
LDP" for a now-generic macro.All four doc attributes in
define_simple_pair_imm_offset_rules!say "LDPwith 64-bit destination, base register with aligned immediate offset." This macro is now instantiated forLdnp/Stnp(and presumablyStp) too, so the generated rustdoc for those types will incorrectly referenceLDP.✏️ Suggested fix using $mnem via paste doc concatenation
- #[doc = r" `LDP` with 64-bit destination, base register with aligned immediate offset."] + #[doc = "`" $mnem "` with base register with aligned immediate offset."] impl<Rt1, Rt2, B> $trait_name<Rt1, Rt2, (B, $offset_type)>(similarly for the other three doc attributes at lines 511, 529, 547, inside the same
::paste::paste!context if moved there, or otherwise using a generic non-mnemonic-specific wording.)🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@harm/src/instructions/ldst/macros.rs` around lines 493 - 547, Update the four doc attributes in define_simple_pair_imm_offset_rules! to avoid hardcoding “LDP”; interpolate the macro’s $mnem value within the existing paste context, or use wording that is correct for every generated instruction such as Ldnp and Stnp.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@harm/src/instructions/ldst/ldnp.rs`:
- Around line 35-38: Correct the doc comments for the MakeLdnp trait in
harm/src/instructions/ldst/ldnp.rs lines 35-38 by changing “possible was” to
“possible ways” and “faillible” to “fallible”; apply the same wording fixes to
the corresponding MakeStnp documentation in harm/src/instructions/ldst/stnp.rs
lines 35-38.
---
Outside diff comments:
In `@harm/src/instructions/ldst/macros.rs`:
- Around line 493-547: Update the four doc attributes in
define_simple_pair_imm_offset_rules! to avoid hardcoding “LDP”; interpolate the
macro’s $mnem value within the existing paste context, or use wording that is
correct for every generated instruction such as Ldnp and Stnp.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: b8b43483-3b15-400d-b022-26ed888c0af2
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
harm/src/instructions/ldst.rsharm/src/instructions/ldst/ldnp.rsharm/src/instructions/ldst/macros.rsharm/src/instructions/ldst/stnp.rs
Use real mnemonics for docstring.
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Action performedReview finished.
|
Summary by CodeRabbit
ldnpandstnp).