rth@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> On 12/09/2013 10:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> From: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> This adds support for the load/store forms using a register offset.
>>
<snip>
>> +/*
>> + * C3.3.10 Load/store (register offset)
>> + *
>> + * 31 30 29 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 16 15 13 12 11 10 9 5 4 0
>> + * +----+-------+---+-----+-----+---+------+-----+--+-----+----+----+
>> + * |size| 1 1 1 | V | 0 0 | opc | 1 | Rm | opt | S| 1 0 | Rn | Rt |
>> + * +----+-------+---+-----+-----+---+------+-----+--+-----+----+----+
>> + *
>> + * For non-vector:
>> + * size: 00-> byte, 01 -> 16 bit, 10 -> 32bit, 11 -> 64bit
>> + * opc: 00 -> store, 01 -> loadu, 10 -> loads 64, 11 -> loads 32
>> + * For vector:
>> + * size is opc<1>:size<1:0> so 100 -> 128 bit; 110 and 111 unallocated
>> + * opc<0>: 0 -> store, 1 -> load
>> + * V: 1 -> vector/simd
>> + * opt: extend encoding (see DecodeRegExtend)
>> + * S: if S=1 then scale (essentially index by sizeof(size))
>> + * Rt: register to transfer into/out of
>> + * Rn: address register or SP for base
>> + * Rm: offset register or ZR for offset
>> + */
>> +static void handle_ldst_reg_roffset(DisasContext *s, uint32_t insn)
>> +{
>> + int rt = extract32(insn, 0, 5);
>> + int rn = extract32(insn, 5, 5);
>> + int shift = extract32(insn, 12, 1);
>> + int rm = extract32(insn, 16, 5);
>> + int opc = extract32(insn, 22, 2);
>> + int opt = extract32(insn, 13, 3);
>> + int size = extract32(insn, 30, 2);
>> + bool is_signed = false;
>> + bool is_store = false;
>> + bool is_extended = false;
>> + bool is_vector = extract32(insn, 26, 1);
>> +
>> + TCGv_i64 tcg_rm;
>> + TCGv_i64 tcg_addr;
>> +
>> + if (extract32(opt, 1, 1) == 0) {
>> + unallocated_encoding(s);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (is_vector) {
>> + size |= (opc & 2) << 1;
>> + if (size > 4) {
>> + unallocated_encoding(s);
>> + }
>> + is_store = ((opc & 1) == 0);
>> + } else {
>> + if (size == 3 && opc == 2) {
>> + /* PRFM - prefetch */
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + is_store = (opc == 0);
>> + is_signed = opc & (1<<1);
>> + is_extended = (size < 3) && (opc & 1);
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (rn == 31) {
>> + gen_check_sp_alignment(s);
>> + }
>> + tcg_addr = read_cpu_reg_sp(s, rn, 1);
>> +
>> + tcg_rm = read_cpu_reg(s, rm, 1);
>> + ext_and_shift_reg(tcg_rm, tcg_rm, opt, shift ? size : 0);
>> +
>> + tcg_gen_add_i64(tcg_addr, tcg_addr, tcg_rm);
>> +
>> + if (is_vector) {
>> + if (is_store) {
>> + do_fp_st(s, rt, tcg_addr, size);
>> + } else {
>> + do_fp_ld(s, rt, tcg_addr, size);
>> + }
>> + } else {
>> + TCGv_i64 tcg_rt = cpu_reg(s, rt);
>> + if (is_store) {
>> + do_gpr_st(s, tcg_rt, tcg_addr, size);
>> + } else {
>> + do_gpr_ld(s, tcg_rt, tcg_addr, size, is_signed, is_extended);
>> + }
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I wonder if it would be better to merge this function with the one from the
> previous patch. There are only 3-4 lines that are different.
I was trying to avoid having it jump through special cases when decoding
the instruction where Rm, opt, S class with the imm field in the other
form. But certainly there is an argument for the rest of the common code
to be shared (size/opc decoding and final tcg_addr based load/store).
However my preference unless there is a strong objection would be to
clean that up in later patches. For one thing the more instructions each
patch handles the longer it takes to run the instruction validation on
the rather slow models to have good coverage of the decoder!
>
>
> r~
--
Alex Bennée
QEMU/KVM Hacker for Linaro
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
