public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nelson Chu <nelson@rivosinc.com>
To: Tsukasa OI <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
	Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@sifive.com>,
	 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	binutils@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] RISC-V: Fallback for instructions longer than 64b
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 17:41:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPpQWtC5yT6jPgxErKJExZOOL4wT9mEKp4wt2gvybCdixtdfaA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc5c5820-1363-d5ac-7a5d-9811f879d418@irq.a4lg.com>

On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 9:32 PM Tsukasa OI <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com> wrote:
>
> On 2022/10/14 10:32, Nelson Chu wrote:
> > In fact we don't really need this change, since so far the parameter
> > length of validate_riscv_insn will only be 2 and 4,
> > https://github.com/bminor/binutils-gdb/blob/master/gas/config/tc-riscv.c#L134
> The argument "length" of validate_riscv_insn will be 2, 4 OR 0 but this
> is not the point.
>
> I have to agree that this change alone will not change the behavior.
> Still, I don't want to surprise future developers with "instruction
> length support" status (as Jan added).  To note, commit message of PATCH
> 1/2 is an important part of this patchset.
>
> Could you reconsider this patchset again?

OK, please commit.

Thanks
Nelson

> Thanks,
> Tsukasa
>
> >
> > Nelson
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 5:56 PM Tsukasa OI <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> We don't support instructions longer than 64-bits yet.  Still, we can
> >> modify validate_riscv_insn function to prevent unexpected behavior by
> >> limiting the "length" of an instruction to 64-bit (or less).
> >>
> >> gas/ChangeLog:
> >>
> >>         * config/tc-riscv.c (validate_riscv_insn): Fix function
> >>         description comment based on current spec.  Limit instruction
> >>         length up to 64-bit for now.  Make sure that required_bits does
> >>         not corrupt even if unsigned long long is longer than 64-bit.
> >> ---
> >>  gas/config/tc-riscv.c | 13 ++++++++-----
> >>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/gas/config/tc-riscv.c b/gas/config/tc-riscv.c
> >> index 22385d1baa0..41d6dfc6062 100644
> >> --- a/gas/config/tc-riscv.c
> >> +++ b/gas/config/tc-riscv.c
> >> @@ -1109,7 +1109,8 @@ arg_lookup (char **s, const char *const *array, size_t size, unsigned *regnop)
> >>
> >>  /* For consistency checking, verify that all bits are specified either
> >>     by the match/mask part of the instruction definition, or by the
> >> -   operand list. The `length` could be 0, 4 or 8, 0 for auto detection.  */
> >> +   operand list. The `length` could be the actual instruction length or
> >> +   0 for auto-detection.  */
> >>
> >>  static bool
> >>  validate_riscv_insn (const struct riscv_opcode *opc, int length)
> >> @@ -1120,11 +1121,13 @@ validate_riscv_insn (const struct riscv_opcode *opc, int length)
> >>    insn_t required_bits;
> >>
> >>    if (length == 0)
> >> -    insn_width = 8 * riscv_insn_length (opc->match);
> >> -  else
> >> -    insn_width = 8 * length;
> >> +    length = riscv_insn_length (opc->match);
> >> +  /* We don't support instructions longer than 64-bits yet.  */
> >> +  if (length > 8)
> >> +    length = 8;
> >> +  insn_width = 8 * length;
> >>
> >> -  required_bits = ~0ULL >> (64 - insn_width);
> >> +  required_bits = ((insn_t)~0ULL) >> (64 - insn_width);
> >>
> >>    if ((used_bits & opc->match) != (opc->match & required_bits))
> >>      {
> >> --
> >> 2.34.1
> >>
> >

  reply	other threads:[~2022-10-28  9:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-07-09  3:50 [PATCH 0/2] RISC-V: Improve "bits undefined" diagnostics Tsukasa OI
2022-07-09  3:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Tsukasa OI
2022-07-09  3:50 ` [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: Fix required bits on certain environments Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  4:40 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] RISC-V: Improve "bits undefined" diagnostics Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  4:40   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] RISC-V: Fallback for instructions longer than 64b Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  8:22     ` Jan Beulich
2022-10-06  9:52       ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  4:40   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] RISC-V: Improve "bits undefined" diagnostics Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  8:26     ` Jan Beulich
2022-10-06  8:34       ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  8:43         ` Jan Beulich
2022-10-06  9:56   ` [PATCH v3 0/2] " Tsukasa OI
2022-10-06  9:56     ` [PATCH v3 1/2] RISC-V: Fallback for instructions longer than 64b Tsukasa OI
2022-10-14  1:32       ` Nelson Chu
2022-10-14  7:07         ` Jan Beulich
2022-10-16 13:32         ` Tsukasa OI
2022-10-28  9:41           ` Nelson Chu [this message]
2022-10-06  9:56     ` [PATCH v3 2/2] RISC-V: Improve "bits undefined" diagnostics Tsukasa OI

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAPpQWtC5yT6jPgxErKJExZOOL4wT9mEKp4wt2gvybCdixtdfaA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=nelson@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=kito.cheng@sifive.com \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).