public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	david@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/8] s390x: lib: Extend bitops
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:31:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e0bcb199-7254-01bb-baee-7de83b62495a@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210813103240.33710ea6@p-imbrenda>

On 8/13/21 10:32 AM, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2021 07:36:08 +0000
> Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> Bit setting and clearing is never bad to have.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>  lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h | 102
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 102
>> insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h b/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h
>> index 792881ec..f5612855 100644
>> --- a/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h
>> +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h
>> @@ -17,6 +17,78 @@
>>  
>>  #define BITS_PER_LONG	64
>>  
>> +static inline unsigned long *bitops_word(unsigned long nr,
>> +					 const volatile unsigned
>> long *ptr) +{
>> +	unsigned long addr;
>> +
>> +	addr = (unsigned long)ptr + ((nr ^ (nr & (BITS_PER_LONG -
>> 1))) >> 3);
>> +	return (unsigned long *)addr;
> 
> why not just 
> 
> return ptr + (nr / BITS_PER_LONG);
> 
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline unsigned long bitops_mask(unsigned long nr)
>> +{
>> +	return 1UL << (nr & (BITS_PER_LONG - 1));
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline uint64_t laog(volatile unsigned long *ptr, uint64_t
>> mask) +{
>> +	uint64_t old;
>> +
>> +	/* load and or 64bit concurrent and interlocked */
>> +	asm volatile(
>> +		"	laog	%[old],%[mask],%[ptr]\n"
>> +		: [old] "=d" (old), [ptr] "+Q" (*ptr)
>> +		: [mask] "d" (mask)
>> +		: "memory", "cc" );
>> +	return old;
>> +}
> 
> do we really need the artillery (asm) here?
> is there a reason why we can't do this in C?

Those are the interlocked/atomic instructions and even though we don't
exactly need them right now I wanted to add them for completeness.
We might be able to achieve the same via compiler functionality but this
is not my expertise. Maybe Thomas or David have a few pointers for me?

> 
>> +static inline uint64_t lang(volatile unsigned long *ptr, uint64_t
>> mask) +{
>> +	uint64_t old;
>> +
>> +	/* load and and 64bit concurrent and interlocked */
>> +	asm volatile(
>> +		"	lang	%[old],%[mask],%[ptr]\n"
>> +		: [old] "=d" (old), [ptr] "+Q" (*ptr)
>> +		: [mask] "d" (mask)
>> +		: "memory", "cc" );
>> +	return old;
>> +}
> 
> (same here as above)
> 
>> +
>> +static inline void set_bit(unsigned long nr,
>> +			   const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	uint64_t mask = bitops_mask(nr);
>> +	uint64_t *addr = bitops_word(nr, ptr);
>> +
>> +	laog(addr, mask);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void set_bit_inv(unsigned long nr,
>> +			       const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	return set_bit(nr ^ (BITS_PER_LONG - 1), ptr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void clear_bit(unsigned long nr,
>> +			     const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	uint64_t mask = bitops_mask(nr);
>> +	uint64_t *addr = bitops_word(nr, ptr);
>> +
>> +	lang(addr, ~mask);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void clear_bit_inv(unsigned long nr,
>> +				 const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	return clear_bit(nr ^ (BITS_PER_LONG - 1), ptr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* non-atomic bit manipulation functions */
>> +
>>  static inline bool test_bit(unsigned long nr,
>>  			    const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>>  {
>> @@ -33,4 +105,34 @@ static inline bool test_bit_inv(unsigned long nr,
>>  	return test_bit(nr ^ (BITS_PER_LONG - 1), ptr);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static inline void __set_bit(unsigned long nr,
>> +			     const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	uint64_t mask = bitops_mask(nr);
>> +	uint64_t *addr = bitops_word(nr, ptr);
>> +
>> +	*addr |= mask;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void __set_bit_inv(unsigned long nr,
>> +				 const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	return __set_bit(nr ^ (BITS_PER_LONG - 1), ptr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void __clear_bit(unsigned long nr,
>> +			       const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	uint64_t mask = bitops_mask(nr);
>> +	uint64_t *addr = bitops_word(nr, ptr);
>> +
>> +	*addr &= ~mask;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void __clear_bit_inv(unsigned long nr,
>> +				   const volatile unsigned long *ptr)
>> +{
>> +	return __clear_bit(nr ^ (BITS_PER_LONG - 1), ptr);
>> +}
>> +
>>  #endif
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-13 11:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-13  7:36 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 0/8] s390x: Cleanup and maintenance Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/8] s390x: lib: Extend bitops Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:32   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-13 11:31     ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2021-08-18  8:20       ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-18  8:39         ` Janosch Frank
2021-08-18  8:57           ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/8] lib: s390x: Add 0x3d, 0x3e and 0x3f PGM constants Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:20   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 3/8] lib: s390x: Print addressing related exception information Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:40   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-13 11:34     ` Janosch Frank
2021-08-18  9:12   ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-18  9:29     ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-18  9:53     ` Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 4/8] lib: s390x: Start using bitops instead of magic constants Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:41   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-18  9:24   ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 5/8] s390x: uv-host: Explain why we set up the home space and remove the space change Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:45   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-13 13:14     ` Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 6/8] lib: s390x: Add PSW_MASK_64 Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:46   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-18  9:28   ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 7/8] lib: s390x: Control register constant cleanup Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:49   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-13  9:09     ` Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  7:36 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 8/8] lib: s390x: uv: Add rc 0x100 query error handling Janosch Frank
2021-08-13  8:50   ` Claudio Imbrenda
2021-08-18  9:30   ` Thomas Huth
2021-08-18  9:57     ` Janosch Frank

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=e0bcb199-7254-01bb-baee-7de83b62495a@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox