[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160511093139.GA3206@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 11:31:39 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: zengzhaoxiu@....com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bp@...e.de,
gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, andi@...stfloor.org,
dvyukov@...gle.com, Zhaoxiu Zeng <zhaoxiu.zeng@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V4 09/31] bitops: Add x86-specific parity functions
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 05:16:38PM +0800, zengzhaoxiu@....com wrote:
> +static inline unsigned int __arch_parity4(unsigned int w)
> +{
> + unsigned int res = 0;
> +
> + asm("test $0xf, %1; setpo %b0"
> + : "+q" (res)
> + : "r" (w)
> + : "cc");
> +
> + return res;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int __arch_parity8(unsigned int w)
> +{
> + unsigned int res = 0;
> +
> + asm("test %1, %1; setpo %b0"
> + : "+q" (res)
> + : "r" (w)
> + : "cc");
> +
> + return res;
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned int __arch_parity16(unsigned int w)
> +{
> + unsigned int res = 0;
> +
> + asm("xor %h1, %b1; setpo %b0"
> + : "+q" (res), "+q" (w)
> + : : "cc");
> +
> + return res;
> +}
Please use the GEN_*_RMWcc() stuff to avoid the setpo where possible.
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
> +/* popcnt %eax, %eax -- redundant REX prefix for alignment */
> +#define POPCNT32 ".byte 0xf3,0x40,0x0f,0xb8,0xc0"
> +/* popcnt %rax, %rax */
> +#define POPCNT64 ".byte 0xf3,0x48,0x0f,0xb8,0xc0"
> +#else
> +/* popcnt %eax, %eax */
> +#define POPCNT32 ".byte 0xf3,0x0f,0xb8,0xc0"
> +#endif
Yuck, please don't duplicate stuff like this.
> +
> +static __always_inline unsigned int __arch_parity32(unsigned int w)
> +{
> + unsigned int res;
> + unsigned int tmp;
> +
> + asm(ALTERNATIVE(
> + " mov %%eax, %1 \n"
> + " shr $16, %%eax \n"
> + " xor %1, %%eax \n"
> + " xor %%ah, %%al \n"
> + " mov $0, %%eax \n"
> + " setpo %%al \n",
> + POPCNT32 " \n"
> + " and $1, %%eax \n",
> + X86_FEATURE_POPCNT)
> + : "=a" (res), "=&r" (tmp)
> + : "a" (w)
> + : "cc");
> +
> + return res;
> +}
How many bytes does that end up being? Should we make it a call?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists