| Summary: | support byte reverse instructions in PowerISA v3.1B in binutils | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Libre-SOC's first SoC | Reporter: | Dmitry Selyutin <ghostmansd> |
| Component: | Source Code | Assignee: | Dmitry Selyutin <ghostmansd> |
| Status: | RESOLVED INVALID | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | andy.miroshnikov, libre-soc-bugs, programmerjake |
| Priority: | --- | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows | ||
| See Also: |
https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1119 https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1147 |
||
| NLnet milestone: | --- | total budget (EUR) for completion of task and all subtasks: | 0 |
| budget (EUR) for this task, excluding subtasks' budget: | 0 | parent task for budget allocation: | |
| child tasks for budget allocation: | The table of payments (in EUR) for this task; TOML format: | ||
|
Description
Dmitry Selyutin
2023-08-30 16:08:46 BST
These instructions, like instructions from #1147, are present in vanilla binutils, but lack corresponding SVP64 code. (In reply to Dmitry Selyutin from comment #0) > All instructions listed in #1119 need binutils support. iirc #1119 has the budget for these, since lkcl was expecting you to just do them as part of #1119 and I assigned budget based on that. so, do you want to move that budget here or close this and just use #1119? (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #2) > (In reply to Dmitry Selyutin from comment #0) > > All instructions listed in #1119 need binutils support. > > iirc #1119 has the budget for these, since lkcl was expecting you to just do > them as part of #1119 and I assigned budget based on that. so, do you want > to move that budget here or close this and just use #1119? or we could close this and add the budget to bug #1047 so they're all in one place? (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #3) > or we could close this and add the budget to bug #1047 so they're all in one > place? I assume you mean #1147, right? Well, it were you to add "except byte reverses". :-) (In reply to Dmitry Selyutin from comment #4) > (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #3) > > or we could close this and add the budget to bug #1047 so they're all in one > > place? > > I assume you mean #1147, right? yes, oops. > Well, it were you to add "except byte > reverses". :-) i can always undo that...I just did it since I thought the plan was to do byte reverses as part of #1119 (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #5) > i can always undo that...I just did it since I thought the plan was to do > byte reverses as part of #1119 lkcl requested merging into #1147 unless you think the task is big enough that you'd need more money before fully completing it: https://libre-soc.org/irclog/%23libre-soc.2023-08-30.log.html#t2023-08-30T16:43:44 ghostmansd, what do you think? (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #6) > (In reply to Jacob Lifshay from comment #5) > > i can always undo that...I just did it since I thought the plan was to do > > byte reverses as part of #1119 > > lkcl requested merging into #1147 unless you think the task is big enough > that you'd need more money before fully completing it: > https://libre-soc.org/irclog/%23libre-soc.2023-08-30.log.html#t2023-08-30T16: > 43:44 > ghostmansd, what do you think? I'm totally fine with having one big task. Some rationale on why things ended up this way: we had two tasks for supporting these instructions in ISACaller, I just made two symmetrical tasks for binutils. As for the payment, I'm not sure what sum to put. Based on my experience with 1068 and similar tasks, there might be issues on openpower-isa side (be it codegen, new operands or states, etc.). Even 700 EUR for 1147 was an arbitrary choice based on the fact that 1119 (which gave birth to 1148) had 300 EUR... |