All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RFCv3 08/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_movewide()
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 10:41:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140717094101.GD21153@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140716220422.GB18109@gup76>

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:04:22PM +0100, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 07:25:06AM +0100, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
> > > Introduce function to generate move wide (immediate) instructions.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +u32 aarch64_insn_gen_movewide(enum aarch64_insn_register dst,
> > > +			      int imm, int shift,
> > > +			      enum aarch64_insn_variant variant,
> > > +			      enum aarch64_insn_movewide_type type)
> > > +{
> > > +	u32 insn;
> > > +
> > > +	switch (type) {
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_MOVEWIDE_ZERO:
> > > +		insn = aarch64_insn_get_movz_value();
> > > +		break;
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_MOVEWIDE_KEEP:
> > > +		insn = aarch64_insn_get_movk_value();
> > > +		break;
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_MOVEWIDE_INVERSE:
> > > +		insn = aarch64_insn_get_movn_value();
> > > +		break;
> > > +	default:
> > > +		BUG_ON(1);
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	BUG_ON(imm < 0 || imm > 65535);
> > 
> > Do this check with masking instead?
> 
> Ok, if you prefer, I can change it to:
> 
> 	BUG_ON(imm & ~GENMASK(15, 0));

Sure, that or use a named constant for the upper-bound (SZ_64K - 1).

> > > +	switch (variant) {
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_32BIT:
> > > +		BUG_ON(shift != 0 && shift != 16);
> > > +		break;
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_64BIT:
> > > +		insn |= BIT(31);
> > > +		BUG_ON(shift != 0 && shift != 16 && shift != 32 &&
> > > +		       shift != 48);
> > 
> > Would be neater as a nested switch, perhaps? If you reorder the
> > outer-switch, you could probably fall-through too and combine the shift
> > checks.
> 
> Not sure I picture what you had in mind... I couldn't come up with a
> neater version with the properties you described.
> 
> The alternative I had was using masks instead of integer values, but
> one could argue that while neater, it could also be harder to read:
> 
> 	switch (variant) {
> 	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_32BIT:
> 		BUG_ON(shift & ~BIT(4));
> 		break;
> 	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_64BIT:
> 		insn |= BIT(31);
> 		BUG_ON(shift & ~GENMASK(5, 4));
> 	...

I was thinking of using nested switches, but that doesn't fall out like I
hoped. How about:

	switch (variant) {
	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_64BIT:
		BUG_ON(shift != 32 && shift != 48);
	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_32BIT:
		BUG_ON(shift != 0 && shift != 16);
	};

?

Will

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Jiang Liu <liuj97@gmail.com>,
	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv3 08/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_movewide()
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 10:41:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140717094101.GD21153@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140716220422.GB18109@gup76>

On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:04:22PM +0100, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 07:25:06AM +0100, Zi Shen Lim wrote:
> > > Introduce function to generate move wide (immediate) instructions.
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +u32 aarch64_insn_gen_movewide(enum aarch64_insn_register dst,
> > > +			      int imm, int shift,
> > > +			      enum aarch64_insn_variant variant,
> > > +			      enum aarch64_insn_movewide_type type)
> > > +{
> > > +	u32 insn;
> > > +
> > > +	switch (type) {
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_MOVEWIDE_ZERO:
> > > +		insn = aarch64_insn_get_movz_value();
> > > +		break;
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_MOVEWIDE_KEEP:
> > > +		insn = aarch64_insn_get_movk_value();
> > > +		break;
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_MOVEWIDE_INVERSE:
> > > +		insn = aarch64_insn_get_movn_value();
> > > +		break;
> > > +	default:
> > > +		BUG_ON(1);
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	BUG_ON(imm < 0 || imm > 65535);
> > 
> > Do this check with masking instead?
> 
> Ok, if you prefer, I can change it to:
> 
> 	BUG_ON(imm & ~GENMASK(15, 0));

Sure, that or use a named constant for the upper-bound (SZ_64K - 1).

> > > +	switch (variant) {
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_32BIT:
> > > +		BUG_ON(shift != 0 && shift != 16);
> > > +		break;
> > > +	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_64BIT:
> > > +		insn |= BIT(31);
> > > +		BUG_ON(shift != 0 && shift != 16 && shift != 32 &&
> > > +		       shift != 48);
> > 
> > Would be neater as a nested switch, perhaps? If you reorder the
> > outer-switch, you could probably fall-through too and combine the shift
> > checks.
> 
> Not sure I picture what you had in mind... I couldn't come up with a
> neater version with the properties you described.
> 
> The alternative I had was using masks instead of integer values, but
> one could argue that while neater, it could also be harder to read:
> 
> 	switch (variant) {
> 	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_32BIT:
> 		BUG_ON(shift & ~BIT(4));
> 		break;
> 	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_64BIT:
> 		insn |= BIT(31);
> 		BUG_ON(shift & ~GENMASK(5, 4));
> 	...

I was thinking of using nested switches, but that doesn't fall out like I
hoped. How about:

	switch (variant) {
	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_64BIT:
		BUG_ON(shift != 32 && shift != 48);
	case AARCH64_INSN_VARIANT_32BIT:
		BUG_ON(shift != 0 && shift != 16);
	};

?

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-17  9:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-15  6:24 [PATCH RFCv3 00/14] arm64: eBPF JIT compiler Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:24 ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:24 ` [PATCH RFCv3 01/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_comp_branch_imm() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:24   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-16 16:04   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 16:04     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 21:19     ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-16 21:19       ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-17  9:19       ` Will Deacon
2014-07-17  9:19         ` Will Deacon
2014-07-17 15:59         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2014-07-17 15:59           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2014-07-17 17:25           ` Will Deacon
2014-07-17 17:25             ` Will Deacon
2014-07-17 17:25             ` Will Deacon
2014-07-18  5:44             ` Z Lim
2014-07-18  5:44               ` Z Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 02/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_branch_reg() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 03/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_cond_branch_imm() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 04/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_load_store_reg() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 05/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_load_store_pair() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 06/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_add_sub_imm() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 07/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_bitfield() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 08/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_movewide() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-16 16:17   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 16:17     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 16:25     ` David Laight
2014-07-16 16:25       ` David Laight
2014-07-16 22:04     ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-16 22:04       ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-17  9:41       ` Will Deacon [this message]
2014-07-17  9:41         ` Will Deacon
2014-07-17  9:51         ` David Laight
2014-07-17  9:51           ` David Laight
2014-07-18  5:47         ` Z Lim
2014-07-18  5:47           ` Z Lim
2014-07-18  8:43           ` Will Deacon
2014-07-18  8:43             ` Will Deacon
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 09/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_add_sub_shifted_reg() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 10/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_data1() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 11/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_data2() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 12/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_data3() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 13/14] arm64: introduce aarch64_insn_gen_logical_shifted_reg() Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25 ` [PATCH RFCv3 14/14] arm64: eBPF JIT compiler Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-15  6:25   ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-16 10:41 ` [PATCH RFCv3 00/14] " Will Deacon
2014-07-16 10:41   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 16:21   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 16:21     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-16 22:18     ` Zi Shen Lim
2014-07-16 22:18       ` Zi Shen Lim

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20140717094101.GD21153@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.