qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v11 03/16] target/riscv: clwz must ignore high bits (use shif


From: Philipp Tomsich
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 03/16] target/riscv: clwz must ignore high bits (use shift-left & changed logic)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 12:24:25 +0200



On Tue 14. Sep 2021 at 11:15, LIU Zhiwei <zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com> wrote:

On 2021/9/11 下午10:00, Philipp Tomsich wrote:
> Assume clzw being executed on a register that is not sign-extended, such
> as for the following sequence that uses (1ULL << 63) | 392 as the operand
> to clzw:
>       bseti   a2, zero, 63
>       addi    a2, a2, 392
>       clzw    a3, a2
> The correct result of clzw would be 23, but the current implementation
> returns -32 (as it performs a 64bit clz, which results in 0 leading zero
> bits, and then subtracts 32).

As the MSB word of  a3 has been cleaned,  the result of current
implementation will be 23. So there is no
error here.

Zhiwei,

bits [63:32] on rs (arg1) are not zero-extended, as ctx->w is not being set (the EXT_ZERO doesn’t have any effect, unless ctx->w is true).  Please see the earlier discussion on this topic in v9 and v10.

Thanks,
Philipp.

Thanks,
Zhiwei

> Fix this by changing the implementation to:
>   1. shift the original register up by 32
>   2. performs a target-length (64bit) clz
>   3. return 32 if no bits are set
>
> Marking this instruction as 'w-form' (i.e., setting ctx->w) would not
> correctly model the behaviour, as the instruction should not perform
> a zero-extensions on the input (after all, it is not a .uw instruction)
> and the result is always in the range 0..32 (so neither a sign-extension
> nor a zero-extension on the result will ever be needed).  Consequently,
> we do not set ctx->w and mark the instruction as EXT_NONE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>
> ---
>
> Changes in v11:
> - Swaps out the EXT_ZERO to EXT_NONE, as no extension is to be performed.
>
> Changes in v10:
> - New patch, fixing correctnes for clzw called on a register with undefined
>    (as in: not properly sign-extended) upper bits.
>
>   target/riscv/insn_trans/trans_rvb.c.inc | 8 +++++---
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/riscv/insn_trans/trans_rvb.c.inc b/target/riscv/insn_trans/trans_rvb.c.inc
> index 6c85c89f6d..73d1e45026 100644
> --- a/target/riscv/insn_trans/trans_rvb.c.inc
> +++ b/target/riscv/insn_trans/trans_rvb.c.inc
> @@ -349,15 +349,17 @@ GEN_TRANS_SHADD(3)
>   
>   static void gen_clzw(TCGv ret, TCGv arg1)
>   {
> -    tcg_gen_clzi_tl(ret, arg1, 64);
> -    tcg_gen_subi_tl(ret, ret, 32);
> +    TCGv t = tcg_temp_new();
> +    tcg_gen_shli_tl(t, arg1, 32);
> +    tcg_gen_clzi_tl(ret, t, 32);
> +    tcg_temp_free(t);
>   }
>   
>   static bool trans_clzw(DisasContext *ctx, arg_clzw *a)
>   {
>       REQUIRE_64BIT(ctx);
>       REQUIRE_EXT(ctx, RVB);
> -    return gen_unary(ctx, a, EXT_ZERO, gen_clzw);
> +    return gen_unary(ctx, a, EXT_NONE, gen_clzw);
>   }
>   
>   static void gen_ctzw(TCGv ret, TCGv arg1)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]