From: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
xiao.w.wang@intel.com, Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
pulehui@huawei.com, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: separate Zbb optimisations requiring and not requiring toolchain support
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 21:58:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZkWSioeSHh8p3pxM@ghost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240515-hedging-passage-44fd394ab1be@spud>
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 04:27:40PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>
> It seems a bit ridiculous to require toolchain support for BPF to
> assemble Zbb instructions, so introduce hidden a Kconfig option that
> controls the use of any toolchain-requiring optimisations while support
> is available.
>
> Zbb support has always depended on alternatives, so while adjusting the
> config options guarding optimisations, remove any checks for
> whether or not alternatives are enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
>
> This patch stems out of a conversation about Zba optimisations in BPF.
> I'm not super sold on the approach in all honesty, even though we
> recently had a conversation about respecting the Kconfig options - but
> at this point I'd be convinced to just add some wording to the Kconfig
> options mentioning that BPF optimisations are excluded.
> Having hidden options that mean someone can turn what on what they
> think are Zbb optimisations but not actually get any cos their toolchain
> doesn't support it seems crap to me. I don't wanna add another
> user-visible option for that situation cos I wanna try to minimise the
> extent of our extension-related Kconfig options, not blow them up like
> Augustus Gloop!
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.
>
> CC: xiao.w.wang@intel.com
> CC: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
> CC: pulehui@huawei.com
> CC: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
> CC: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>
> CC: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
> CC: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> CC: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 15 ++++++++++++---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h | 3 +--
> arch/riscv/lib/csum.c | 9 +++------
> arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S | 4 ++--
> 8 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> index e927b52b420c..f216a52ed181 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> @@ -605,14 +605,23 @@ config TOOLCHAIN_HAS_VECTOR_CRYPTO
> def_bool $(as-instr, .option arch$(comma) +v$(comma) +zvkb)
> depends on AS_HAS_OPTION_ARCH
>
> -config RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> - bool "Zbb extension support for bit manipulation instructions"
> +config RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> + def_bool RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> depends on TOOLCHAIN_HAS_ZBB
> depends on RISCV_ALTERNATIVE
> + help
> + This option controls whether or not we build optimisations that
> + depend on toolchain support. It's automatically enabled whenever the
> + toolchain in use supports assembling Zbb instructions and
> + RISCV_ISA_ZBB is set.
> +
> +config RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> + bool "Zbb extension support for bit manipulation instructions"
> default y
> help
> Add support for enabling optimisations in the kernel when the
> - Zbb extension is detected at boot.
> + Zbb extension is detected at boot. Some optimisations may
> + additionally depend on toolchain support for Zbb.
>
> The Zbb extension provides instructions to accelerate a number
> of bit-specific operations (count bit population, sign extending,
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> index 85b2c443823e..a677f6b82228 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
>
> static __always_inline unsigned int __arch_hweight32(unsigned int w)
> {
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> asm goto(ALTERNATIVE("j %l[legacy]", "nop", 0,
> RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, 1)
> : : : : legacy);
> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static inline unsigned int __arch_hweight8(unsigned int w)
> #if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
> static __always_inline unsigned long __arch_hweight64(__u64 w)
> {
> -# ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +# ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> asm goto(ALTERNATIVE("j %l[legacy]", "nop", 0,
> RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, 1)
> : : : : legacy);
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
> index 880606b0469a..3ed810a6123d 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
> #include <asm/barrier.h>
> #include <asm/bitsperlong.h>
>
> -#if !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE)
> +#if !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE)
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/__ffs.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/__fls.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/ffs.h>
> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static __always_inline int variable_fls(unsigned int x)
> variable_fls(x_); \
> })
>
> -#endif /* !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE) */
> +#endif /* !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE) */
>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/ffz.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h
> index 88e6f1499e88..956224ea8199 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h
> @@ -49,8 +49,7 @@ static inline __sum16 ip_fast_csum(const void *iph, unsigned int ihl)
> * ZBB only saves three instructions on 32-bit and five on 64-bit so not
> * worth checking if supported without Alternatives.
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> asm goto(ALTERNATIVE("j %l[no_zbb]", "nop", 0,
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c b/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c
> index 7fb12c59e571..7a97394c252b 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c
> @@ -44,8 +44,7 @@ __sum16 csum_ipv6_magic(const struct in6_addr *saddr,
> * Zbb support saves 4 instructions, so not worth checking without
> * alternatives if supported
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> /*
> @@ -161,8 +160,7 @@ do_csum_with_alignment(const unsigned char *buff, int len)
> * Zbb support saves 6 instructions, so not worth checking without
> * alternatives if supported
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> /*
> @@ -248,8 +246,7 @@ do_csum_no_alignment(const unsigned char *buff, int len)
> * Zbb support saves 6 instructions, so not worth checking without
> * alternatives if supported
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> /*
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S b/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S
> index 687b2bea5c43..a4dd2ac306f1 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> /* int strcmp(const char *cs, const char *ct) */
> SYM_FUNC_START(strcmp)
>
> - ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strcmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> + ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strcmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)
>
> /*
> * Returns
> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(strcmp)
> * The code was published as part of the bitmanip manual
> * in Appendix A.
> */
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> strcmp_zbb:
>
> .option push
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S b/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S
> index 8ae3064e45ff..3ab1310a7b83 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> /* int strlen(const char *s) */
> SYM_FUNC_START(strlen)
>
> - ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strlen_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> + ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strlen_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)
I appreciate the direction this is going in, getting rid of the
CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE checks in the code that checks
CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB is a great change.
I am missing why these str functions are changed to use
CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT when the __arch_hweight* functions were left as
using CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB in their alternatives.
- Charlie
>
> /*
> * Returns
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(strlen)
> /*
> * Variant of strlen using the ZBB extension if available
> */
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> strlen_zbb:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S b/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S
> index aba5b3148621..aeed830804d7 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> /* int strncmp(const char *cs, const char *ct, size_t count) */
> SYM_FUNC_START(strncmp)
>
> - ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strncmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> + ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strncmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)
>
> /*
> * Returns
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(strncmp)
> /*
> * Variant of strncmp using the ZBB extension if available
> */
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> strncmp_zbb:
>
> .option push
> --
> 2.43.0
>
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
xiao.w.wang@intel.com, Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
pulehui@huawei.com, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] RISC-V: separate Zbb optimisations requiring and not requiring toolchain support
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 21:58:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZkWSioeSHh8p3pxM@ghost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240515-hedging-passage-44fd394ab1be@spud>
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 04:27:40PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>
> It seems a bit ridiculous to require toolchain support for BPF to
> assemble Zbb instructions, so introduce hidden a Kconfig option that
> controls the use of any toolchain-requiring optimisations while support
> is available.
>
> Zbb support has always depended on alternatives, so while adjusting the
> config options guarding optimisations, remove any checks for
> whether or not alternatives are enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
>
> This patch stems out of a conversation about Zba optimisations in BPF.
> I'm not super sold on the approach in all honesty, even though we
> recently had a conversation about respecting the Kconfig options - but
> at this point I'd be convinced to just add some wording to the Kconfig
> options mentioning that BPF optimisations are excluded.
> Having hidden options that mean someone can turn what on what they
> think are Zbb optimisations but not actually get any cos their toolchain
> doesn't support it seems crap to me. I don't wanna add another
> user-visible option for that situation cos I wanna try to minimise the
> extent of our extension-related Kconfig options, not blow them up like
> Augustus Gloop!
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.
>
> CC: xiao.w.wang@intel.com
> CC: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
> CC: pulehui@huawei.com
> CC: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
> CC: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>
> CC: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
> CC: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> CC: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 15 ++++++++++++---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h | 3 +--
> arch/riscv/lib/csum.c | 9 +++------
> arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S | 4 ++--
> arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S | 4 ++--
> 8 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> index e927b52b420c..f216a52ed181 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
> @@ -605,14 +605,23 @@ config TOOLCHAIN_HAS_VECTOR_CRYPTO
> def_bool $(as-instr, .option arch$(comma) +v$(comma) +zvkb)
> depends on AS_HAS_OPTION_ARCH
>
> -config RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> - bool "Zbb extension support for bit manipulation instructions"
> +config RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> + def_bool RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> depends on TOOLCHAIN_HAS_ZBB
> depends on RISCV_ALTERNATIVE
> + help
> + This option controls whether or not we build optimisations that
> + depend on toolchain support. It's automatically enabled whenever the
> + toolchain in use supports assembling Zbb instructions and
> + RISCV_ISA_ZBB is set.
> +
> +config RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> + bool "Zbb extension support for bit manipulation instructions"
> default y
> help
> Add support for enabling optimisations in the kernel when the
> - Zbb extension is detected at boot.
> + Zbb extension is detected at boot. Some optimisations may
> + additionally depend on toolchain support for Zbb.
>
> The Zbb extension provides instructions to accelerate a number
> of bit-specific operations (count bit population, sign extending,
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> index 85b2c443823e..a677f6b82228 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
>
> static __always_inline unsigned int __arch_hweight32(unsigned int w)
> {
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> asm goto(ALTERNATIVE("j %l[legacy]", "nop", 0,
> RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, 1)
> : : : : legacy);
> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static inline unsigned int __arch_hweight8(unsigned int w)
> #if BITS_PER_LONG == 64
> static __always_inline unsigned long __arch_hweight64(__u64 w)
> {
> -# ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +# ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> asm goto(ALTERNATIVE("j %l[legacy]", "nop", 0,
> RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, 1)
> : : : : legacy);
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
> index 880606b0469a..3ed810a6123d 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/bitops.h
> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
> #include <asm/barrier.h>
> #include <asm/bitsperlong.h>
>
> -#if !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE)
> +#if !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE)
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/__ffs.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/__fls.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/ffs.h>
> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static __always_inline int variable_fls(unsigned int x)
> variable_fls(x_); \
> })
>
> -#endif /* !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE) */
> +#endif /* !defined(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT) || defined(NO_ALTERNATIVE) */
>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/ffz.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h
> index 88e6f1499e88..956224ea8199 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/checksum.h
> @@ -49,8 +49,7 @@ static inline __sum16 ip_fast_csum(const void *iph, unsigned int ihl)
> * ZBB only saves three instructions on 32-bit and five on 64-bit so not
> * worth checking if supported without Alternatives.
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> asm goto(ALTERNATIVE("j %l[no_zbb]", "nop", 0,
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c b/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c
> index 7fb12c59e571..7a97394c252b 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/csum.c
> @@ -44,8 +44,7 @@ __sum16 csum_ipv6_magic(const struct in6_addr *saddr,
> * Zbb support saves 4 instructions, so not worth checking without
> * alternatives if supported
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> /*
> @@ -161,8 +160,7 @@ do_csum_with_alignment(const unsigned char *buff, int len)
> * Zbb support saves 6 instructions, so not worth checking without
> * alternatives if supported
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> /*
> @@ -248,8 +246,7 @@ do_csum_no_alignment(const unsigned char *buff, int len)
> * Zbb support saves 6 instructions, so not worth checking without
> * alternatives if supported
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB) &&
> - IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE)) {
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)) {
> unsigned long fold_temp;
>
> /*
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S b/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S
> index 687b2bea5c43..a4dd2ac306f1 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/strcmp.S
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> /* int strcmp(const char *cs, const char *ct) */
> SYM_FUNC_START(strcmp)
>
> - ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strcmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> + ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strcmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)
>
> /*
> * Returns
> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(strcmp)
> * The code was published as part of the bitmanip manual
> * in Appendix A.
> */
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> strcmp_zbb:
>
> .option push
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S b/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S
> index 8ae3064e45ff..3ab1310a7b83 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/strlen.S
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> /* int strlen(const char *s) */
> SYM_FUNC_START(strlen)
>
> - ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strlen_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> + ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strlen_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)
I appreciate the direction this is going in, getting rid of the
CONFIG_RISCV_ALTERNATIVE checks in the code that checks
CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB is a great change.
I am missing why these str functions are changed to use
CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT when the __arch_hweight* functions were left as
using CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB in their alternatives.
- Charlie
>
> /*
> * Returns
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(strlen)
> /*
> * Variant of strlen using the ZBB extension if available
> */
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> strlen_zbb:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_BIG_ENDIAN
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S b/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S
> index aba5b3148621..aeed830804d7 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S
> +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/strncmp.S
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> /* int strncmp(const char *cs, const char *ct, size_t count) */
> SYM_FUNC_START(strncmp)
>
> - ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strncmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> + ALTERNATIVE("nop", "j strncmp_zbb", 0, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB, CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT)
>
> /*
> * Returns
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(strncmp)
> /*
> * Variant of strncmp using the ZBB extension if available
> */
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT
> strncmp_zbb:
>
> .option push
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-16 4:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-15 15:27 [PATCH v1] RISC-V: separate Zbb optimisations requiring and not requiring toolchain support Conor Dooley
2024-05-15 15:27 ` Conor Dooley
2024-05-16 4:58 ` Charlie Jenkins [this message]
2024-05-16 4:58 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-05-16 6:37 ` Conor Dooley
2024-05-16 6:37 ` Conor Dooley
2024-05-16 7:59 ` Andrew Jones
2024-05-16 7:59 ` Andrew Jones
2024-05-16 8:59 ` Conor Dooley
2024-05-16 8:59 ` Conor Dooley
2024-05-16 10:29 ` Andrew Jones
2024-05-16 10:29 ` Andrew Jones
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=ZkWSioeSHh8p3pxM@ghost \
--to=charlie@rivosinc.com \
--cc=ajones@ventanamicro.com \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=conor@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=pulehui@huawei.com \
--cc=xiao.w.wang@intel.com \
/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.