public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Marvin Häuser" <mhaeuser@posteo.de>
To: Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@gmail.com>
Cc: edk2-devel-groups-io <devel@edk2.groups.io>,
	Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>,
	Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>,
	Zhiguang Liu <zhiguang.liu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] MdePkg/Base.h: Simply alignment expressions
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 09:08:14 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F145F74-96D2-48FA-A22E-9A99809F6E35@posteo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <30BAE3A6-AA5B-4092-9736-A9E9D9408C4B@posteo.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4172 bytes --]



> On 16. May 2023, at 09:18, Marvin Häuser <mhaeuser@posteo.de> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 16. May 2023, at 04:22, Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 2:46 AM gaoliming via groups.io
>> <gaoliming=byosoft.com.cn@groups.io> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Pedro:
>>> 
>>>> -----邮件原件-----
>>>> 发件人: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> 代表 Pedro Falcato
>>>> 发送时间: 2023年5月15日 23:15
>>>> 收件人: devel@edk2.groups.io
>>>> 抄送: 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>
>>>> 主题: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] MdePkg/Base.h: Simply alignment
>>>> expressions
>>>> 
>>>> 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 a bitwise NOT of Value to get the
>>>> addend for alignment, as, for instance:
>>>>     ~15 & (16 - 1) = 1
>>>>     15 + 1 = 16
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>>     ~15 & (16 - 1) = 1
>>> Its value should be zero, not 1. I also verify the updated ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND.
>>> Its value is incorrect. Please double check.
>> 
>> Hi Liming, you're 100% right. There was a mixup when we were
>> discussing this optimization, and I got the mental calculations wrong
>> there.
>> Two's complement is definitely what we want, as one's complement is
>> always off by one (from what we want).
>> 
>> So negation (-) works beautifully, as seen in the old codegen (we
>> figured this out from the compiler's output).
> 
> To be clear on the maths side of things:
> 
> “& (Alignment - 1U)” is equivalent to “mod Alignment” for powers of two.
> “-Value” is equivalent to “2^N - Value” once the expression is promoted to an unsigned type, where N is the precision of said type.
> 
> So, the old expression basically was “(Alignment - Value) mod Alignment” and the new expression is “(2^N - Value) mod Alignment”. By modulo laws, we can apply the mod to the operands, which for the left ones gives us “Alignment mod Alignment = 0” and “2^N mod Alignment = 0”, obviously for Alignment being a power of two. They’re trivially equivalent.

Sorry, I have to add a correction here. This assumes that 2^N >= Alignment, which somehow I took for granted, but by removing Alignment from the expression, -Value will have the precision of Value rather than the higher precision out of {Alignment, Value}, which silently changes the semantics of N and thus 2^N. For Alignment > 2^(precision of Value), this will indeed not work.

Both current issues would be resolved by some mechanism to type-promote on demand. I.e. if for ALIGN_VALUE, the sub-expression (Alignment - 1U) in ~(Alignment - 1U) was promoted to the precision of Value, and for ALIGN_VALUE_ADDEND, the sub-expression Value in -Value was promoted to the precision of Alignment, both would be correct.

Best regards,
Marvin.

> 
> If you want a more technical explanation - previously, only the lower “Alignment - 1” Bits of the result were considered. As they are 0 for Alignment, the left operand, basically you get:
> 
> Result = (Alignment - Value) & (Alignment - 1) = (Alignment - Value)[0 : Alignment - 1] = (Alignment[0 : Alignment - 1] - Value[0 : Alignment - 1])[…] = (0 - Value[…])[…]
> 
> As you can see, only the lower Alignment -1 Bits of both operands matter and they are always equal for Alignment and 0.
> 
> Best regards,
> Marvin
> 
>> 
>> Sent a v3.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Pedro


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 15175 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2023-05-16  9:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-15 15:14 [PATCH v2 1/1] MdePkg/Base.h: Simply alignment expressions Pedro Falcato
2023-05-16  1:46 ` 回复: [edk2-devel] " gaoliming
2023-05-16  2:22   ` Pedro Falcato
2023-05-16  7:18     ` Marvin Häuser
2023-05-16  9:08       ` Marvin Häuser [this message]

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=4F145F74-96D2-48FA-A22E-9A99809F6E35@posteo.de \
    --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