From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64ACCC43331 for ; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 14:44:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 375FD20716 for ; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 14:44:14 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 375FD20716 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=c-sky.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:53650 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jICh3-0000AH-Aj for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 10:44:13 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35191) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jICg6-0007hk-4l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 10:43:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jICg4-0003sF-OM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 10:43:13 -0400 Received: from smtp2200-217.mail.aliyun.com ([121.197.200.217]:35486) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jICg4-0003hn-8J; Sat, 28 Mar 2020 10:43:12 -0400 X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=CONTINUE; BC=0.08220347|-1; CH=green; DM=|CONTINUE|false|; DS=CONTINUE|ham_regular_dialog|0.273993-0.000289021-0.725718; FP=0|0|0|0|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=e01a16384; MF=zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com; NM=1; PH=DS; RN=9; RT=9; SR=0; TI=SMTPD_---.H6i7wTa_1585406580; Received: from 192.168.3.18(mailfrom:zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com fp:SMTPD_---.H6i7wTa_1585406580) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(10.147.40.7); Sat, 28 Mar 2020 22:43:01 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 10/61] target/riscv: vector single-width integer add and subtract To: Richard Henderson , alistair23@gmail.com, chihmin.chao@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com References: <20200317150653.9008-1-zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com> <20200317150653.9008-11-zhiwei_liu@c-sky.com> From: LIU Zhiwei Message-ID: <49463664-5c32-ff20-63ec-f874790ac84c@c-sky.com> Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 22:42:59 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 121.197.200.217 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guoren@linux.alibaba.com, wenmeng_zhang@c-sky.com, qemu-riscv@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, wxy194768@alibaba-inc.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 2020/3/28 7:54, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 3/17/20 8:06 AM, LIU Zhiwei wrote: >> + if (a->vm && s->vl_eq_vlmax) { >> + gvec_fn(s->sew, vreg_ofs(s, a->rd), >> + vreg_ofs(s, a->rs2), vreg_ofs(s, a->rs1), >> + MAXSZ(s), MAXSZ(s)); > Indentation is off here. Do you mean I should adjust the indentation for parameters in gvec_fn like + if (a->vm && s->vl_eq_vlmax) { + gvec_fn(s->sew, vreg_ofs(s, a->rd), + vreg_ofs(s, a->rs2), vreg_ofs(s, a->rs1), + MAXSZ(s), MAXSZ(s)); >> +static inline bool >> +do_opivx_gvec(DisasContext *s, arg_rmrr *a, GVecGen2sFn *gvec_fn, >> + gen_helper_opivx *fn) >> +{ >> + if (!opivx_check(s, a)) { >> + return false; >> + } >> + >> + if (a->vm && s->vl_eq_vlmax) { >> + TCGv_i64 src1 = tcg_temp_new_i64(); >> + TCGv tmp = tcg_temp_new(); >> + >> + gen_get_gpr(tmp, a->rs1); >> + tcg_gen_ext_tl_i64(src1, tmp); >> + gvec_fn(s->sew, vreg_ofs(s, a->rd), vreg_ofs(s, a->rs2), >> + src1, MAXSZ(s), MAXSZ(s)); >> + >> + tcg_temp_free_i64(src1); >> + tcg_temp_free(tmp); >> + return true; >> + } else { >> + return opivx_trans(a->rd, a->rs1, a->rs2, a->vm, fn, s); >> + } >> + return true; >> +} > This final return is unreachable, and I'm sure some static analyzer (e.g. > Coverity) will complain. > > Since the if-then has a return, we can drop the else like so: > > if (a->vm && s->vl_eq_vlmax) { > ... > return true; > } > return opivx_trans(a->rd, a->rs1, a->rs2, a->vm, fn, s); Yes, it's tidier. Thanks. Zhiwei > > Otherwise, > Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson > > r~