[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1430528414.16357.201.camel@freescale.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 20:00:14 -0500
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To: christophe leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2,2/2] powerpc32: add support for csum_add()
On Tue, 2015-04-28 at 21:01 +0200, christophe leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 25/03/2015 02:30, Scott Wood a écrit :
>
> > On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 12:39:27PM +0100, LEROY Christophe wrote:
> > > The C version of csum_add() as defined in include/net/checksum.h gives the
> > > following assembly:
> > > 0: 7c 04 1a 14 add r0,r4,r3
> > > 4: 7c 64 00 10 subfc r3,r4,r0
> > > 8: 7c 63 19 10 subfe r3,r3,r3
> > > c: 7c 63 00 50 subf r3,r3,r0
> > >
> > > include/net/checksum.h also offers the possibility to define an arch specific
> > > function.
> > > This patch provides a ppc32 specific csum_add() inline function.
> > What makes it 32-bit specific?
> >
> >
> As far as I understand, the 64-bit will do a 64 bit addition, so we
> will have to handle differently the carry, can't just be an addze like
> in 32-bit.
OK. Before I couldn't find where this was ifdeffed to 32-bit, but it's
in patch 1/2.
> The generated code is most likely different on ppc64. I have no ppc64
> compiler so I can't check what gcc generates for the following code:
>
> __wsum csum_add(__wsum csum, __wsum addend)
> {
> u32 res = (__force u32)csum;
> res += (__force u32)addend;
> return (__force __wsum)(res + (res < (__force u32)addend));
> }
>
> Can someone with a ppc64 compiler tell what we get ?
With CONFIG_GENERIC_CPU:
0xc000000000001af8 <+0>: add r3,r3,r4
0xc000000000001afc <+4>: cmplw cr7,r3,r4
0xc000000000001b00 <+8>: mfcr r4
0xc000000000001b04 <+12>: rlwinm r4,r4,29,31,31
0xc000000000001b08 <+16>: add r3,r4,r3
0xc000000000001b0c <+20>: clrldi r3,r3,32
0xc000000000001b10 <+24>: blr
The mfcr is particularly nasty, at least on our chips.
With CONFIG_CPU_E6500:
0xc000000000001b30 <+0>: add r3,r3,r4
0xc000000000001b34 <+4>: cmplw cr7,r3,r4
0xc000000000001b38 <+8>: mfocrf r4,1
0xc000000000001b3c <+12>: rlwinm r4,r4,29,31,31
0xc000000000001b40 <+16>: add r3,r4,r3
0xc000000000001b44 <+20>: clrldi r3,r3,32
0xc000000000001b48 <+24>: blr
Ideal (short of a 64-bit __wsum) would probably be something like (untested):
add r3,r3,r4
srdi r5,r3,32
add r3,r3,r5
clrldi r3,r3,32
Or in C code (which would let the compiler schedule it better):
static inline __wsum csum_add(__wsum csum, __wsum addend)
{
u64 res = (__force u64)csum;
res += (__force u32)addend;
return (__force __wsum)((u32)res + (res >> 32));
}
-Scott
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists