[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c05ada1f-1499-1218-2c35-5dd0070fe2f7@c-s.fr>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:01:39 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: powerpc: Discard ffs() function and use builtin_ffs instead
Le 13/05/2016 à 08:53, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
>
>
> Le 13/05/2016 à 08:16, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
>> On Thu, 2016-12-05 at 15:32:22 UTC, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>>> With the ffs() function as defined in arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h
>>> GCC will not optimise the code in case of constant parameter, as shown
>>> by the small exemple below.
>>>
>>> int ffs_test(void)
>>> {
>>> return 4 << ffs(31);
>>> }
>>>
>>> c0012334 <ffs_test>:
>>> c0012334: 39 20 00 01 li r9,1
>>> c0012338: 38 60 00 04 li r3,4
>>> c001233c: 7d 29 00 34 cntlzw r9,r9
>>> c0012340: 21 29 00 20 subfic r9,r9,32
>>> c0012344: 7c 63 48 30 slw r3,r3,r9
>>> c0012348: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>>>
>>> With this patch, the same function will compile as follows:
>>>
>>> c0012334 <ffs_test>:
>>> c0012334: 38 60 00 08 li r3,8
>>> c0012338: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>>
>> But what code does it generate when it's not a constant?
>
> The generated code is the same with and without the patch when not a
> constant:
>
> int ffs_test2(int x)
> {
> return ffs(x);
> }
>
> c001233c <ffs_test2>:
> c001233c: 7d 23 00 d0 neg r9,r3
> c0012340: 7d 23 18 38 and r3,r9,r3
> c0012344: 7c 63 00 34 cntlzw r3,r3
> c0012348: 20 63 00 20 subfic r3,r3,32
> c001234c: 4e 80 00 20 blr
>
>>
>> And which gcc version first added the builtin version?
> Don't know, but __builtin_ffs() is already used in
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/page_32.h
>
Hi Michael,
Any change to get it into 4.9 ?
Christophe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists