From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43322) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGK6t-0002y3-Vx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 05:10:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGK6t-0002vp-1E for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 05:10:35 -0400 References: <20190411100836.646-1-david@redhat.com> <20190411100836.646-16-david@redhat.com> <1365cc84-fdb6-3a36-9b5f-6921f04423e0@linaro.org> From: David Hildenbrand Message-ID: <190241b2-efbe-c700-32dd-180ac0d25150@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 11:10:30 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1365cc84-fdb6-3a36-9b5f-6921f04423e0@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 15/41] s390x/tcg: Implement VECTOR GALOIS FIELD MULTIPLY SUM (AND ACCUMULATE) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Richard Henderson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Cornelia Huck , Thomas Huth , Richard Henderson On 13.04.19 01:44, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 4/11/19 12:08 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> A galois field multiplication in field 2 is like binary multiplication, >> however instead of doing ordinary binary additions, xor's are performed. >> So no carries are considered. >> >> Implement all variants via helpers. s390_vec_sar() and s390_vec_shr() >> will be reused later on. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand >> --- >> target/s390x/helper.h | 8 ++ >> target/s390x/insn-data.def | 4 + >> target/s390x/translate_vx.inc.c | 38 ++++++++ >> target/s390x/vec_int_helper.c | 168 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 4 files changed, 218 insertions(+) > > FYI, this is now the 4th copy of this operation. > > arm: pmull > x86: pclmulqdq > ppc: vpmsum[bhwd] > > We really should promote this to generic. But that can come later, huh, I tried my best to search for anything related to galois, but seems like only s390x uses that terminology. :) Well at least I learned how it is supposed to be calculated. Thanks! > > Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson > > > r~ > -- Thanks, David / dhildenb