From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51290) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1epKYS-0004kt-7D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:06:57 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1epKYP-0005nW-2r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:06:56 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::231]:35293) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1epKYO-0005mu-RE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:06:52 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-x231.google.com with SMTP id y186so3324542pfb.2 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:06:52 -0800 (PST) References: <20180217182323.25885-1-richard.henderson@linaro.org> <20180217182323.25885-41-richard.henderson@linaro.org> From: Richard Henderson Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:06:48 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 40/67] target/arm: Implement SVE Integer Compare - Scalars Group List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , qemu-arm On 02/23/2018 09:00 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> + >> +uint32_t HELPER(sve_while)(void *vd, uint32_t count, uint32_t pred_desc) > > This could really use a comment about what part of the overall > instruction it's doing. Ok. >> + >> + /* For the helper, compress the different conditions into a computation >> + * of how many iterations for which the condition is true. >> + * >> + * This is slightly complicated by 0 <= UINT64_MAX, which is nominally >> + * 2**64 iterations, overflowing to 0. Of course, predicate registers >> + * aren't that large, so any value >= predicate size is sufficient. >> + */ ... > I got confused by this -- it is too far different from what the > pseudocode is doing. Could we have more explanatory comments, please? Ok. I guess the comment above wasn't as helpful as I imagined. I'll come up with something for the next round. r~