[PATCH v2 07/19] arm64: insn: Add encoder for bitwise operations using litterals

[Marc Zyngier]

On 13/12/17 15:45, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Marc,
> 
> On 13/12/17 14:32, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 12/12/17 18:32, James Morse wrote:
>>> On 11/12/17 14:49, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>> We lack a way to encode operations such as AND, ORR, EOR that take
>>>> an immediate value. Doing so is quite involved, and is all about
>>>> reverse engineering the decoding algorithm described in the
>>>> pseudocode function DecodeBitMasks().
> 
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
>>>> index 7e432662d454..326b17016485 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
>>>
>>>> +static u32 aarch64_encode_immediate(u64 imm,
>>>> +				    enum aarch64_insn_variant variant,
>>>> +				    u32 insn)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	unsigned int immr, imms, n, ones, ror, esz, tmp;
>>>> +	u64 mask;
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> +	/* Compute the rotation */
>>>> +	if (range_of_ones(imm)) {
>>>> +		/*
>>>> +		 * Pattern: 0..01..10..0
>>>> +		 *
>>>> +		 * Compute how many rotate we need to align it right
>>>> +		 */
>>>> +		ror = ffs(imm) - 1;
>>>
>>> (how come range_of_ones() uses __ffs64() on the same value?)
>>
>> News flash: range_of_ones is completely buggy. It will fail on the 
>> trivial value 1 (__ffs64(1) = 0; 0 - 1 = -1; val >> -1 is... ermmmm).
>> I definitely got mixed up between the two.
> 
> They do different things!? Aaaaaahhhh....
> 
> [ ...]
> 
>>> Unless I've gone wrong, I think the 'Trim imm to the element size' code needs to
>>> move up into the esz-reducing loop so it doesn't happen for a 64bit immediate.
> 
> 
>> Yup. I've stashed the following patch:
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
>> index b8fb2d89b3a6..e58be1c57f18 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
>> @@ -1503,8 +1503,7 @@ pstate_check_t * const aarch32_opcode_cond_checks[16] = {
>>  static bool range_of_ones(u64 val)
>>  {
>>  	/* Doesn't handle full ones or full zeroes */
>> -	int x = __ffs64(val) - 1;
>> -	u64 sval = val >> x;
>> +	u64 sval = val >> __ffs64(val);
>>  
>>  	/* One of Sean Eron Anderson's bithack tricks */
>>  	return ((sval + 1) & (sval)) == 0;
>> @@ -1515,7 +1514,7 @@ static u32 aarch64_encode_immediate(u64 imm,
>>  				    u32 insn)
>>  {
>>  	unsigned int immr, imms, n, ones, ror, esz, tmp;
>> -	u64 mask;
>> +	u64 mask = ~0UL;
>>  
>>  	/* Can't encode full zeroes or full ones */
>>  	if (!imm || !~imm)
>> @@ -1543,8 +1542,12 @@ static u32 aarch64_encode_immediate(u64 imm,
>>  	for (tmp = esz; tmp > 2; tmp /= 2) {
>>  		u64 emask = BIT(tmp / 2) - 1;
>>  
>> -		if ((imm & emask) != ((imm >> (tmp / 2)) & emask))
>> +		if ((imm & emask) != ((imm >> (tmp / 2)) & emask)) {
>> +			/* Trim imm to the element size */
>> +			mask = BIT(esz - 1) - 1;
>> +			imm &= mask;
> 
> Won't this still lose the top bit? It generates 0x7fffffff for esz=32, and for
> esz=32 we run through here when the two 16bit values are different.
> 
> This still runs for a 64bit immediate. The 0xf80000000fffffff example compares
> 0xf8000000 with 0fffffff then breaks here on the first iteration of this loop.
> With this change it still attempts to generate a 64bit mask.
> 
> I was thinking of something like [0]. That only runs when we know the two
> tmp:halves match, it just keeps the bottom tmp:half for the next run and never
> runs for a 64bit immediate.

You're right. Again. And I can't think. That's it, I'm implementing the
testing rig.

> [0] Not even built:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
> index 12d3ec2154c2..d9fbdea7b18d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/insn.c
> @@ -1529,15 +1529,15 @@ static u32 aarch64_encode_immediate(u64 imm,
>                         break;
> 
>                 esz = tmp;
> +
> +               /* Trim imm to the element size */
> +               mask = BIT(esz) - 1;
> +               imm &= mask;
>         }
> 
>         /* N is only set if we're encoding a 64bit value */
>         n = esz == 64;
> 
> -       /* Trim imm to the element size */
> -       mask = BIT(esz - 1) - 1;
> -       imm &= mask;
> -
>         /* That's how many ones we need to encode */
>         ones = hweight64(imm);

This is definitely much better.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...