[PATCH 1/4] [RFC] Add generic ARM instruction set condition code checks.
Will Deacon
will.deacon at arm.com
Mon Nov 21 13:52:16 EST 2011
Hi Leif,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 06:30:46PM +0000, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> This patch breaks the ARM condition checking code out of nwfpe/fpopcode.{ch}
> into a standalone file for opcode operations. It also modifies the code
> somwhat for coding style adherence, and adds some temporary variables for
> increased readability.
s/somwhat/somewhat/
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/opcodes.c b/arch/arm/kernel/opcodes.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..8adc20c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/opcodes.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
> +/*
> + * linux/arch/arm/kernel/opcodes.c
> + *
> + * A32 condition code lookup feature moved from nwfpe/fpopcode.c
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + */
> +
> +#include <asm/opcodes.h>
> +
> +#define ARM_OPCODE_UNCONDITIONAL 0xf
Maybe ARM_OPCODE_CONDITION_UNCOND or something (in case we decide to put
more opcodes in here).
> +/*
> + * condition code lookup table
> + * index into the table is test code: EQ, NE, ... LT, GT, AL, NV
> + *
> + * bit position in short is condition code: NZCV
> + */
> +static const unsigned short cc_map[16] = {
> + 0xF0F0, /* EQ == Z set */
> + 0x0F0F, /* NE */
> + 0xCCCC, /* CS == C set */
> + 0x3333, /* CC */
> + 0xFF00, /* MI == N set */
> + 0x00FF, /* PL */
> + 0xAAAA, /* VS == V set */
> + 0x5555, /* VC */
> + 0x0C0C, /* HI == C set && Z clear */
> + 0xF3F3, /* LS == C clear || Z set */
> + 0xAA55, /* GE == (N==V) */
> + 0x55AA, /* LT == (N!=V) */
> + 0x0A05, /* GT == (!Z && (N==V)) */
> + 0xF5FA, /* LE == (Z || (N!=V)) */
> + 0xFFFF, /* AL always */
> + 0 /* NV */
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * Returns:
> + * 0 - if condition fails
> + * 1 - if condition passes (including AL)
> + * 2 - if unconditional encoding (or before ARMv3, NV condition)
Can you #define these in the header file please? You'll need to make sure
they're available to assembly code too.
> + * Code that needs to check whether a condition has explicitly passed,
> + * should compare the return value to 1.
> + * Code that wants to check if a condition means that the instruction
> + * should be executed, should compare the return value to !0.
> + */
> +unsigned int arm_check_condition(unsigned int opcode, unsigned int psr)
Why not just return int?
> +{
> + unsigned int cc_bits = opcode >> 28;
> + unsigned int psr_cond = psr >> 28;
> +
> + /* NV condition or unconditional */
> + if (cc_bits == ARM_OPCODE_UNCONDITIONAL)
> + return 2;
> +
> + return (cc_map[cc_bits] >> (psr_cond)) & 1;
> +}
Then you can use the new defines here.
Will
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list