All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de>
To: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] tci: Support deposit operations
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 21:12:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <505381AB.3070506@weilnetz.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1347286108.8336.6.camel@pebble.twiddle.home>

Am 10.09.2012 16:08, schrieb Richard Henderson:
> On Sat, 2012-09-08 at 16:12 +0200, Stefan Weil wrote:
>> +            tmp16 = *tb_ptr++;
>> +            tmp8 = *tb_ptr++;
>> +            tmp32 = (((1<<  tmp8) - 1)<<  tmp16);
>> +            tci_write_reg32(t0, (t1&  ~tmp32) | ((t2<<  tmp16)&
>> tmp32));
>
> Use the deposit* functions from bitops.h?
>
>
> r~


Well, that would justify their existence in bitops.h, wouldn't it?

When I wrote deposit for TCI (November 2011), there still
was no bitops.h, and I was just too lazy to modify and test the
code again.

Now I tested code with both my version (with a small correction for
the 64 bit variant) and with the deposit* functions.

Both variants give identical results. The deposit* variant
creates larger (and I expect also less efficient) code.
I doubt that the effect will be measurable in a system emulation.

Results with 64 bit Debian Linux:

my variant
    6909       0     128    7037    1b7d 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/i386-linux-user/tci.o
    6975       0     128    7103    1bbf 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/i386-softmmu/tci.o
    6917       0     128    7045    1b85 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/x86_64-linux-user/tci.o
    6972       0     128    7100    1bbc 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/x86_64-softmmu/tci.o

deposit*
    6935       0     128    7063    1b97 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/i386-linux-user/tci.o
    7000       0     128    7128    1bd8 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/i386-softmmu/tci.o
    6963       0     128    7091    1bb3 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/x86_64-linux-user/tci.o
    6997       0     128    7125    1bd5 
bin/ndebug/x86-tci/x86_64-softmmu/tci.o

Other emulation targets show similar differences.

On a Windows host, the difference was smaller, but still in favour of my 
code.

Regards,
Stefan

      reply	other threads:[~2012-09-14 19:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-08 14:12 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] tci: Support deposit operations Stefan Weil
2012-09-10 14:08 ` Richard Henderson
2012-09-14 19:12   ` Stefan Weil [this message]

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=505381AB.3070506@weilnetz.de \
    --to=sw@weilnetz.de \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=rth@twiddle.net \
    /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.