-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5k
Adding additional 8 eGPR. #113988
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
DeepakRajendrakumaran
wants to merge
15
commits into
dotnet:main
Choose a base branch
from
DeepakRajendrakumaran:allocateRegMin
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+148
−58
Open
Adding additional 8 eGPR. #113988
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
15 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fd5fb2f
Add remaining 8 eGPR
DeepakRajendrakumaran 3bb0a4e
Skip unused regs.
DeepakRajendrakumaran 5363283
Revert "Skip unused regs."
DeepakRajendrakumaran 963c341
Skip unused regs
DeepakRajendrakumaran cb20541
Addressing review comments.
DeepakRajendrakumaran 3c38b92
Revert "Skip unused regs"
DeepakRajendrakumaran 4c6e85a
Addressing Kunal's review comments.
DeepakRajendrakumaran 93bc1dd
Fix formatting
DeepakRajendrakumaran cca23f8
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into origin/allocateRegMin
DeepakRajendrakumaran 247a89c
Clean up macro
DeepakRajendrakumaran bee91d4
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into origin/allocateRegMin
DeepakRajendrakumaran 1be98c6
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin' into origin/allocateRegMin
DeepakRajendrakumaran 163478e
Reverting change for arm and fixing bound
DeepakRajendrakumaran 3f07022
Fix type and addressing review comments.
DeepakRajendrakumaran 374f85b
Fix typo
DeepakRajendrakumaran File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why did you move this only for x64?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The "Space taken up to here" comment, below, is now wrong and needs to be updated, as do the "Space taken up to here" comments that follow.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a bit of a weird problem.
REGNUM_BITS
changing from6
to7
results in_idReg1
and_idReg2
taking up an extra bit each. This throws off theinstrDesc
size forx64
and increases it significantly due to padding. My solution was to move around the position of_idReg1
and_idReg2
to a position forx64
which did not cause addition of as many padding bits.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder why it matters where
_idReg1
/_idReg2
are placed to determine padding. All type types here have a base type ofunsigned
which means that bitfields of them should all be able bit packable. It might make sense for performance reasons to avoid splitting_idReg1
/_idReg2
across 32-bit (or maybe even byte) boundaries, but that's not why you did it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For reference
In main with no changes

If I just add new registers with no change in order for x64

With the change highlighted by you in the PR

There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If i leave it as was, _idReg1 cannot stay within 32 bit boundary since it starts at Byte 3, Bit 2(It was not a problem earlier when it was 6 bits). So, it gets moved to Byte 4, Bit 0
Edit - that's my interpretation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, I see: a bit field can't extend beyond the limit of the base type (here,
unsigned
).btw, is the tool your using to show field offsets public?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The screenshot I used here is from Visual Studio. Click on memory layout from below
The memory viewer in Visual Studio Code isn't as intuitive
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have updated the "Space taken up to here" comments