[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Question on implementation detail of `temp_sync`
From: |
Alex Bennée |
Subject: |
Re: Question on implementation detail of `temp_sync` |
Date: |
Wed, 05 Aug 2020 09:39:28 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.5.5; emacs 28.0.50 |
lrwei <lrwei@bupt.edu.cn> writes:
> Sorry for the unintentional sending of an uncompleted message.
Questions about the internals of the TCG are very much in the remit of
qemu-devel so are likely to get missed on qemu-discuss which is more
aimed at user questions.
>
<re-pasted to fix html noise>
> I understands that the current code works, but gets confused on why `ts`
> needs to be loaded in to a register when `free_or_dead` is not
> set.
It isn't, the break leaves the switch statement once it stores the
constant to memory.
> For example in the following scenario:
> movi_i32 r0, 0x1
> add_i32 r1, r1, r0
> ...
> (where r0 is not used any more, and both r0 and r1 are globals)
> If I am not mistaken, the code gen procedure of the first IR will call
> `temp_sync` with `free_or_dead` not set, which load the constant in to
> a register and store it back to memory. At this time, `r0` will be
> `TEMP_VAL_REG` instead of `TEMP_VAL_CONST`, so the following IR can't
> embed this constant operand in the assembly instruction it produces. Also,
> this results in a seemingly useless register allocation (, why
> don't the further use of r0 use the constant directly?)
Is this what you are actually seeing generated? If you run with -d
in_asm,op,op_opt,out_asm it should be clear what actually happened.
> So I wonder whether there is any reason for this loading a constant into
> register, I'll be very appreciated if someone can point out the
> reason for me.
<snip>
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
> lrwei
>
> ------------------ Original ------------------
> From: "lrwei"<lrwei@bupt.edu.cn>;
> Date: Tue, Aug 4, 2020 12:06 PM
> To: "qemu-discuss"<qemu-discuss@nongnu.org>;
> Subject: Question on implementation detail of `temp_sync`
>
<re-pasted fixing html noise>
> Hello to the list,
> Recently I have been studying the code of TCG, and get confused by the
> following detail in function `temp_sync` in tcg/tcg.c:
> case TEMP_VAL_CONST:
> /* If we're going to free the temp immediately, then we won't
> require it later in a register, so attempt to store the
> constant to memory directly. */
> if (free_or_dead
> && tcg_out_sti(s, ts->type, ts->val,
> ts->mem_base->reg, ts->mem_offset)) {
> break;
> }
> temp_load(s, ts, tcg_target_available_regs[ts->type],
> allocated_regs, preferred_regs);
> /* fallthrough */
> movi_i32
> Would it be better to remove the `free_or_dead` in the if statement, i.e.
> turn the function to be:
> case TEMP_VAL_CONST:
> if (tcg_out_sti(s, ts->type, ts->val,
> ts->mem_base->reg, ts->mem_offset)) {
> break;
> }
> temp_load(s, ts, tcg_target_available_regs[ts->type],
> allocated_regs, preferred_regs);
> /* fallthrough */
--
Alex Bennée
- Re: Question on implementation detail of `temp_sync`,
Alex Bennée <=