Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 04/15] target-mips: refactor {D}LSA, {D}ALIGN, {D}BITSWAP

[Aurelien Jarno]

On 2015-06-24 13:31, Leon Alrae wrote:
> On 24/06/2015 12:04, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >> +static void gen_align(DisasContext *ctx, int opc, int rd, int rs, int rt,
> >> +                      int bp)
> >>  {
> >> +    TCGv t0;
> >> +    if (rd == 0) {
> >> +        /* Treat as NOP. */
> >> +        return;
> >> +    }
> >> +    t0 = tcg_temp_new();
> >> +    gen_load_gpr(t0, rt);
> >> +    if (bp == 0) {
> >> +        tcg_gen_mov_tl(cpu_gpr[rd], t0);
> >> +    } else {
> >> +        TCGv t1 = tcg_temp_new();
> >> +        gen_load_gpr(t1, rs);
> >> +        switch (opc) {
> >> +        case OPC_ALIGN:
> >> +            {
> >> +                TCGv_i64 t2 = tcg_temp_new_i64();
> >> +                tcg_gen_concat_tl_i64(t2, t1, t0);
> >> +                tcg_gen_shri_i64(t2, t2, 8 * (4 - bp));
> >> +                gen_move_low32(cpu_gpr[rd], t2);
> >> +                tcg_temp_free_i64(t2);
> >> +            }
> >> +            break;
> > 
> > Not a problem in your patch (you basically just moved code), but I
> > think this implementation is incorrect. It should be the same code as
> > for DALIGN, but with the input operands zero extended to 32 bits, and
> > the result sign extended to 32 bits. Something like that should work:
> > 
> > tcg_gen_ext32u_tl(t0, t0);
> > tcg_gen_shli_tl(t0, t0, 8 * bp);
> > tcg_gen_ext32u_tl(t1, t1);
> > tcg_gen_shri_tl(t1, t1, 8 * (4 - bp));
> > tcg_gen_or_tl(cpu_gpr[rd], t1, t0);
> > tcg_gen_ext32s_tl(cpu_gpr[rd], cpu_gpr[rd]);
> > 
> > In practice we can drop the zero extension on t0 (rt) as the bits there
> > will be dropped by the sign extension on the result. Note that on
> > 32-bit, the zero and sign extension will be dropped, so there is no need
> > for #ifdef TARGET_MIPS64.
> 
> I believe existing implementation is correct and does the same thing, but it
> operates on the whole 64-bit temp containing merged rs and rt rather than
> shifting 32-bit registers separately. We discussed this last year, and the
> potential benefit is that it could be slightly faster on 64-bit host.

If it is has already been discussed, then:

Reviewed-by: Aurelien Jarno <address@hidden>

-- 
Aurelien Jarno                          GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
address@hidden                 http://www.aurel32.net