ast added inline comments.
================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Target/BPF/BPFInstrInfo.td:783
+ let Inst{47-32} = addr{15-0}; // offset
+ let Inst{11-8} = new;
+ let Inst{7-4} = BPF_CMPXCHG.Value;
----------------
yonghong-song wrote:
> jackmanb wrote:
> > If we go down the route of matching operands with x86 as you have done for
> > `XFALU64` and `XCHG`, I think we should also do it for cmpxchg.
> >
> > IIUC this is `dst = atomic_cmpxchg(*(src + off), r0, new);`
> >
> > But to do it in a single x86 instruction we need to have only 2 operands +
> > the hard-coded r0. `r0 = atomic_xmpxchg(*(dst + off), r0, src);` would seem
> > most natural to me.
> We can do this:
> r0 = atomic_xmpxchg(*(dst + off), r0, src);
I'm confused. Isn't that what that is already?
r0 = atomic_cmpxchg(*(dst + off), r0, src);
In "class CMPXCHG":
let Inst{51-48} = addr{19-16}; // this is 'dst_reg' in bpf_insn.
let Inst{55-52} = new; // this is 'src_reg' in bpf_insn.
Same as old xadd and new fetch_add insns.
What am I missing?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72184/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72184
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
