From: "Cui, Lili" <lili.cui@intel.com>
To: "Beulich, Jan" <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "Lu, Hongjiu" <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>,
"binutils@sourceware.org" <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 4/9] Support APX GPR32 with extend evex prefix
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2023 10:44:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <SJ0PR11MB560046AD070578D5449FD1FB9E8EA@SJ0PR11MB5600.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0bb5fbcd-f58e-48ad-a5ee-3413b026f903@suse.com>
> >> On 24.11.2023 08:02, Cui, Lili wrote:
> >>> @@ -3670,10 +3673,11 @@ install_template (const insn_template *t)
> >>>
> >>> /* Dual VEX/EVEX templates need stripping one of the possible
> variants. */
> >>> if (t->opcode_modifier.vex && t->opcode_modifier.evex)
> >>> - {
> >>> - if ((maybe_cpu (t, CpuAVX) || maybe_cpu (t, CpuAVX2)
> >>> - || maybe_cpu (t, CpuFMA))
> >>> - && (maybe_cpu (t, CpuAVX512F) || maybe_cpu (t, CpuAVX512VL)))
> >>> + {
> >>> + if (AVX512F(CpuAVX) || AVX512F(CpuAVX2) || AVX512F(CpuFMA)
> >>> + || AVX512VL(CpuAVX) || AVX512VL(CpuAVX2) ||
> >> APX_F(CpuCMPCCXADD)
> >>> + || APX_F(CpuAMX_TILE) || APX_F(CpuAVX512F) ||
> >> APX_F(CpuAVX512DQ)
> >>> + || APX_F(CpuAVX512BW) || APX_F(CpuBMI) || APX_F(CpuBMI2))
> >>> {
> >>> if (need_evex_encoding ())
> >>
> >> There are several issues here:
> >> - Why did you need to change (to the worse) the original code?
> >> - Why did you not model the addition after that original code?
> >> - How come APX_F (CpuAVX512*) constructs appear here, when no
> AVX512
> >> insn can be VEX-encoded?
> >
> > I don't understand what you mean, we have this combination.
> >
> > kmov<dq>, 0x<dq:kpfx>90, AVX512BW&(AVX512BW|APX_F),
> > Modrm|Vex128|EVex128|Space0F|VexW1|<dq:kvsz>|NoSuf, {
> > RegMask|<dq:elem>|Unspecified|BaseIndex, RegMask }
>
> Oh, I'm sorry: I forgot about the mask register insns.
>
> >> - If these new macros are really needed for whatever reason, they
> shouldn't
> >> be added to opcodes/i386-opc.h when they're useful only in the
> assembler.
> >> - Style requires a blank before the opening parenthesis in function
> >> invocations (which also covers function-like macro invocations).
> >>
> >> I think I asked before: How is it that you get away without altering
> >> cpu_flags_match(), containing related and quite similar logic?
> >>
> >
> > For the original logic ( ... || ... ) && ( ... || ...), the content in the first bracket
> and the content in the following brackets can be combined arbitrarily. I think
> it is Inaccurate.
>
> In which way? If there are issues with the existing code, these issues want
> taking care of in separate (prereq) patches. Of course there are assumptions
> made here about the CPU combinations that can (and cannot) occur in any of
> our templates. Similar assumptions are imo fine to make in the APX additions.
>
> Note how I used two nested if()s despite that not having been necessary at
> that time. I did so in anticipation that for APX you'd want to add another
> (separate) inner if(), rather than altering the one that's there.
>
Hi Jan,
Could we remove the CPU check here? it's a bit ugly and has limited effectiveness.
if (t->opcode_modifier.vex && t->opcode_modifier.evex)
{
if (AVX512F(CpuAVX) || AVX512F(CpuAVX2) || AVX512F(CpuFMA)
|| AVX512VL(CpuAVX) || AVX512VL(CpuAVX2) || APX_F(CpuCMPCCXADD)
|| APX_F(CpuAMX_TILE) || APX_F(CpuAVX512F) || APX_F(CpuAVX512DQ)
|| APX_F(CpuAVX512BW) || APX_F(CpuBMI) || APX_F(CpuBMI2))
> > So I give examples one by one for each identified combination.
>
> Which examples are you talking about? I see none given in your reply.
>
Sorry, I want to say "I've listed every possible combination".
> > Just found cpu_flags_match() has similar logic, I think the following is the
> only code related to CPUID alerts, but none of our combinations are related
> to cpuavx.
> >
> > if (all.bitfield.cpuavx)
> > {
> > /* We need to check SSE2AVX with AVX. */
> > if (!t->opcode_modifier.sse2avx
> > || (sse2avx && !i.prefix[DATA_PREFIX]))
> > match |= CPU_FLAGS_ARCH_MATCH;
> > }
>
> Not sure why you pick out this one. This special case is needed for sse2avx; I
> don't see how it's related here. What I've been pointing you at is the code in
> that function which follows a similar "Dual VEX/EVEX templates ..."
> comment.
>
I know you're talking about this code, I'm just guessing what it does? Don't know what I missed.
For example
.arch .nobmi
andn (%eax), %eax, %eax
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
if (flag_code != CODE_64BIT)
active = cpu_flags_and_not (cpu_arch_flags, cpu_64_flags);
else
active = cpu_arch_flags; ---> cpubmi = 0;
cpu = cpu_flags_and (all, active); ---> cpuapx =1; cpubmi = 0;
if (cpu_flags_equal (&cpu, &all)) ---> &cpu and &all are not same.
{
...
}
Return CPU_FLAGS_64BIT_MATCH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then we will report an arch error.
if (supported != CPU_FLAGS_PERFECT_MATCH)
{
as_bad (_("`%s' is not supported on `%s%s'"),
insn_name (current_templates.start),
cpu_arch_name ? cpu_arch_name : default_arch,
cpu_sub_arch_name ? cpu_sub_arch_name : "");
return NULL;
}
Thanks,
Lili.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-12 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-24 7:02 [PATCH 1/9] Make const_1_mode print $1 in AT&T syntax Cui, Lili
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 2/9] Support APX GPR32 with rex2 prefix Cui, Lili
2023-12-04 16:30 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-05 13:31 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-06 7:52 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-06 12:43 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-07 9:01 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-08 3:10 ` Cui, Lili
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 3/9] Created an empty EVEX_MAP4_ sub-table for EVEX instructions Cui, Lili
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 4/9] Support APX GPR32 with extend evex prefix Cui, Lili
2023-12-07 12:38 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-08 15:21 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-11 8:34 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 10:44 ` Cui, Lili [this message]
2023-12-12 11:16 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 12:32 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-12 12:39 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 13:15 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-12 14:13 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-13 7:36 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-13 7:48 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 12:58 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-12 14:04 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-13 8:35 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-13 9:13 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-07 13:34 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-11 6:16 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-11 8:43 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-11 11:50 ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 5/9] Add tests for " Cui, Lili
2023-12-07 14:05 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-11 6:16 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-11 8:55 ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 6/9] Support APX NDD Cui, Lili
2023-12-08 14:12 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-11 13:36 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-11 16:50 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-13 10:42 ` Cui, Lili
2024-03-22 10:02 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-22 10:31 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-26 2:04 ` Cui, Lili
2024-03-26 7:06 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-26 7:18 ` Cui, Lili
2024-03-22 10:59 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-26 8:22 ` Cui, Lili
2024-03-26 9:30 ` Jan Beulich
2024-03-27 2:41 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-08 14:27 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 5:53 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-12 8:28 ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 7/9] Support APX Push2/Pop2 Cui, Lili
2023-12-11 11:17 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-15 8:38 ` Cui, Lili
2023-12-15 8:44 ` Jan Beulich
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 8/9] Support APX NDD optimized encoding Cui, Lili
2023-12-11 12:27 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 3:18 ` Hu, Lin1
2023-12-12 8:41 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-13 5:31 ` Hu, Lin1
2023-12-12 8:45 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-13 6:06 ` Hu, Lin1
2023-12-13 8:19 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-13 8:34 ` Hu, Lin1
2023-11-24 7:02 ` [PATCH v3 9/9] Support APX JMPABS for disassembler Cui, Lili
2023-11-24 7:09 ` [PATCH 1/9] Make const_1_mode print $1 in AT&T syntax Jan Beulich
2023-11-24 11:22 ` Cui, Lili
2023-11-24 12:14 ` Jan Beulich
2023-12-12 2:57 ` Lu, Hongjiu
2023-12-12 8:16 ` Cui, Lili
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=SJ0PR11MB560046AD070578D5449FD1FB9E8EA@SJ0PR11MB5600.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=lili.cui@intel.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=hongjiu.lu@intel.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).