public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Pedro Falcato" <pedro.falcato@gmail.com>
To: devel@edk2.groups.io
Cc: "Pedro Falcato" <pedro.falcato@gmail.com>,
	"Michael D Kinney" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>,
	"Liming Gao" <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>,
	"Zhiguang Liu" <zhiguang.liu@intel.com>,
	"Marvin Häuser" <mhaeuser@posteo.de>
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/1] MdePkg/Base.h: Simplify alignment expressions
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 03:19:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230516021921.411852-1-pedro.falcato@gmail.com> (raw)

Simplify ALIGN_VALUE and ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND into simpler expressions.

ALIGN_VALUE can simply be a (value + (align - 1)) & ~align
expression, which works for any power of 2 alignment and generates
smaller code sequences. For instance:
	ALIGN_VALUE(15, 16) = (15 + 15) & ~16 = 16
	ALIGN_VALUE(16, 16) = (16 + 15) & ~16 = 16

Old codegen:
	movq    %rdi, %rax
	negq    %rax
	andl    $15, %eax
	addq    %rdi, %rax

New codegen:
	leaq    15(%rdi), %rax
	andq    $-16, %rax

ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND can simply use the negation of Value to get the
addend for alignment, as, for instance:
	-15 & (16 - 1) = 1
	15 + 1 = 16

This change does not necessarily affect the end result, as the GCC and
clang compilers were already able to see through things and optimize
them into optimal instruction sequences, in the ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND case.

Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>
Cc: Zhiguang Liu <zhiguang.liu@intel.com>
Cc: Marvin Häuser <mhaeuser@posteo.de>
Signed-off-by: Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@gmail.com>
---
Changes:
	- Correct the ADDEND macro to use negation and not a binary NOT (thanks Liming!)
 MdePkg/Include/Base.h | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/MdePkg/Include/Base.h b/MdePkg/Include/Base.h
index 6597e441a6e2..a070593a360d 100644
--- a/MdePkg/Include/Base.h
+++ b/MdePkg/Include/Base.h
@@ -931,7 +931,7 @@ STATIC_ASSERT (ALIGNOF (__VERIFY_INT32_ENUM_SIZE) == sizeof (__VERIFY_INT32_ENUM
 
   @return  Addend to round Value up to alignment boundary Alignment.
 **/
-#define ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND(Value, Alignment)  (((Alignment) - (Value)) & ((Alignment) - 1U))
+#define ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND(Value, Alignment)  ((-(Value)) & ((Alignment) - 1U))
 
 /**
   Rounds a value up to the next boundary using a specified alignment.
@@ -945,7 +945,7 @@ STATIC_ASSERT (ALIGNOF (__VERIFY_INT32_ENUM_SIZE) == sizeof (__VERIFY_INT32_ENUM
   @return  A value up to the next boundary.
 
 **/
-#define ALIGN_VALUE(Value, Alignment)  ((Value) + ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND (Value, Alignment))
+#define ALIGN_VALUE(Value, Alignment)  (((Value) + ((Alignment) - 1U)) & ~(Alignment))
 
 /**
   Adjust a pointer by adding the minimum offset required for it to be aligned on
-- 
2.40.1


             reply	other threads:[~2023-05-16  2:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-16  2:19 Pedro Falcato [this message]
2023-05-16  8:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] MdePkg/Base.h: Simplify alignment expressions Marvin Häuser

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-list 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=20230516021921.411852-1-pedro.falcato@gmail.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /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