Re: powerpc: Discard ffs() function and use builtin_ffs instead
flat view
From: Christophe Leroy <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-16 10:01:52
Also in:
lkml
Le 13/05/2016 à 08:53, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
Le 13/05/2016 à 08:16, Michael Ellerman a écrit :quoted
On Thu, 2016-12-05 at 15:32:22 UTC, Christophe Leroy wrote:quoted
With the ffs() function as defined in arch/powerpc/include/asm/bitops.h GCC will not optimise the code in case of constant parameter, as shown by the small exemple below. int ffs_test(void) { return 4 << ffs(31); } c0012334 <ffs_test>: c0012334: 39 20 00 01 li r9,1 c0012338: 38 60 00 04 li r3,4 c001233c: 7d 29 00 34 cntlzw r9,r9 c0012340: 21 29 00 20 subfic r9,r9,32 c0012344: 7c 63 48 30 slw r3,r3,r9 c0012348: 4e 80 00 20 blr With this patch, the same function will compile as follows: c0012334 <ffs_test>: c0012334: 38 60 00 08 li r3,8 c0012338: 4e 80 00 20 blrBut what code does it generate when it's not a constant?The generated code is the same with and without the patch when not a constant: int ffs_test2(int x) { return ffs(x); } c001233c <ffs_test2>: c001233c: 7d 23 00 d0 neg r9,r3 c0012340: 7d 23 18 38 and r3,r9,r3 c0012344: 7c 63 00 34 cntlzw r3,r3 c0012348: 20 63 00 20 subfic r3,r3,32 c001234c: 4e 80 00 20 blrquoted
And which gcc version first added the builtin version?Don't know, but __builtin_ffs() is already used in arch/powerpc/include/asm/page_32.h
Hi Michael, Any change to get it into 4.9 ? Christophe