[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <80ac616c-0ccd-5db4-31d7-6436a794772e@netronome.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 19:28:24 +0100
From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Cc: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net,
oss-drivers@...ronome.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 7/7] nfp: bpf: migrate to advanced reciprocal
divide in reciprocal_div.h
On 26/06/2018 21:59, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 20:54:21 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> + * NOTE: because we are using "reciprocal_value_adv" which doesn't
>> + * support dividend with MSB set, so we need to JIT separate NFP
>> + * sequence to handle such case. It could be a simple sequence if there
>> + * is conditional move, however there isn't for NFP. So, we don't bother
>> + * generating compare-if-set-branch sequence by rejecting the program
>> + * straight away when the u32 dividend has MSB set. Divide by such a
>> + * large constant would be rare in practice. Also, the programmer could
>> + * simply rewrite it as "result = divisor >= the_const".
> Thinking about this again, can we just use carry bit?
Good catch, yes we can.
> The code may end
> up shorter than the explanation why we don't support that case :P
>
> immed[c, 0]
> alu[--, a, -, b]
> alu[c, c, +carry, 0]
eBPF input will be "a = a / b", given "immed" doesn't affect carry bit,
I'd reorder the sequence so we only need one tmp register for holding
"b" who is constant.
alu[--, a, -, b]
immed[b, 0]
alu[a, b, +carry, 0]
Thanks.
Regards,
Jiong
>
> Should be equivalent to:
>
> c = a >= b
>
> (Thanks to Edwin for double-checking the carry semantics.)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists