On 2/25/20 2:35 AM, LIU Zhiwei wrote:
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsb_v_b, int8_t, int8_t, H1, ldsb)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsb_v_h, int8_t, int16_t, H2, ldsb)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsb_v_w, int8_t, int32_t, H4, ldsb)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsb_v_d, int8_t, int64_t, H8, ldsb)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsh_v_h, int16_t, int16_t, H2, ldsw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsh_v_w, int16_t, int32_t, H4, ldsw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsh_v_d, int16_t, int64_t, H8, ldsw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsw_v_w, int32_t, int32_t, H4, ldl)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsw_v_d, int32_t, int64_t, H8, ldl)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlse_v_b, int8_t, int8_t, H1, ldsb)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlse_v_h, int16_t, int16_t, H2, ldsw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlse_v_w, int32_t, int32_t, H4, ldl)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlse_v_d, int64_t, int64_t, H8, ldq)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsbu_v_b, uint8_t, uint8_t, H1, ldub)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsbu_v_h, uint8_t, uint16_t, H2, ldub)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsbu_v_w, uint8_t, uint32_t, H4, ldub)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlsbu_v_d, uint8_t, uint64_t, H8, ldub)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlshu_v_h, uint16_t, uint16_t, H2, lduw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlshu_v_w, uint16_t, uint32_t, H4, lduw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlshu_v_d, uint16_t, uint64_t, H8, lduw)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlswu_v_w, uint32_t, uint32_t, H4, ldl)
+GEN_VEXT_LD_ELEM(vlswu_v_d, uint32_t, uint64_t, H8, ldl)
Why do you need to define new functions identical to the old ones? Are you
doing this just to make the names match up?
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssb_v_b, int8_t, H1, stb)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssb_v_h, int16_t, H2, stb)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssb_v_w, int32_t, H4, stb)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssb_v_d, int64_t, H8, stb)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssh_v_h, int16_t, H2, stw)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssh_v_w, int32_t, H4, stw)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssh_v_d, int64_t, H8, stw)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssw_v_w, int32_t, H4, stl)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vssw_v_d, int64_t, H8, stl)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vsse_v_b, int8_t, H1, stb)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vsse_v_h, int16_t, H2, stw)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vsse_v_w, int32_t, H4, stl)
+GEN_VEXT_ST_ELEM(vsse_v_d, int64_t, H8, stq)
Likewise.
+static void vext_st_stride(void *vd, void *v0, target_ulong base,
+ target_ulong stride, CPURISCVState *env, uint32_t desc,
+ vext_st_elem_fn st_elem, uint32_t esz, uint32_t msz, uintptr_t ra)
+{
+ uint32_t i, k;
+ uint32_t nf = vext_nf(desc);
+ uint32_t vm = vext_vm(desc);
+ uint32_t mlen = vext_mlen(desc);
+ uint32_t vlmax = vext_maxsz(desc) / esz;
+
+ /* probe every access*/
+ for (i = 0; i < env->vl; i++) {
+ if (!vm && !vext_elem_mask(v0, mlen, i)) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ probe_write_access(env, base + stride * i, nf * msz, ra);
+ }
+ /* store bytes to guest memory */
+ for (i = 0; i < env->vl; i++) {
+ k = 0;
+ if (!vm && !vext_elem_mask(v0, mlen, i)) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ while (k < nf) {
+ target_ulong addr = base + stride * i + k * msz;
+ st_elem(env, addr, i + k * vlmax, vd, ra);
+ k++;
+ }
+ }
+}
Similar comments wrt unifying the load and store helpers.
I'll also note that vext_st_stride and vext_st_us_mask could be unified by
passing sizeof(ETYPE) as stride, and vm = true as a parameter.
