"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n....@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > Balamuruhan S wrote: >> Few ppc instructions are encoded in test_emulate_step.c, consolidate them to >> ppc-opcode.h, fix redefintion errors in bpf_jit caused due to this >> consolidation. >> Reuse the macros from ppc-opcode.h ... >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit32.h b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit32.h >> index 4ec2a9f14f84..8a9f16a7262e 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit32.h >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit32.h >> @@ -76,13 +76,13 @@ DECLARE_LOAD_FUNC(sk_load_byte_msh); >> else { PPC_ADDIS(r, base, IMM_HA(i)); \ >> PPC_LBZ(r, r, IMM_L(i)); } } while(0) >> >> -#define PPC_LD_OFFS(r, base, i) do { if ((i) < 32768) PPC_LD(r, base, i); >> \ >> +#define _OFFS(r, base, i) do { if ((i) < 32768) EMIT(PPC_ENCODE_LD(r, base, >> i)); \ > ^^^^^ > Should be PPC_LD_OFFS. For the next version, please also build ppc32 and > booke codebase to confirm that your changes in those areas are fine. > > PPC_ENCODE_* also looks quite verbose, so perhaps PPC_ENC_* might be > better. Otherwise, this patchset looks good to me and should help reuse > some of those macros, especially from the eBPF codebase. > > Michael, > Can you let us know if this looks ok to you? Based on your feedback, we > will also update the eBPF codebase.
I didn't really like the first patch which does the mass renaming. It creates a huge amount of churn. I think I'd be happier if this series just did what it needs, and then maybe at the end there's a patch to update all the existing names, which I may or may not take. As far as the naming, currently we have: PPC_INST_FOO - just the opcode PPC_FOO(x) - macro to encode the opcode with x and (usually) also emit a .long and stringify. And you need an in-between that gives you the full instruction but without the .long and stringify, right? So how about PPC_RAW_FOO() for just the numeric value, without the .long and stringify. We also seem to have a lot of PPC_INST_FOO's that are only ever used in the PPC_INST macro. I'm inclined to fold those into the PPC_INST macro, to avoid people accidentally using the PPC_INST version when they don't mean to. But that's a separate issue. cheers