diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | arch/microblaze/Kconfig | 1 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | arch/microblaze/include/asm/hash.h | 81 |
2 files changed, 82 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/arch/microblaze/Kconfig b/arch/microblaze/Kconfig index 3d793b55f60c..ce3e512517ce 100644 --- a/arch/microblaze/Kconfig +++ b/arch/microblaze/Kconfig @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ config MICROBLAZE select GENERIC_IRQ_SHOW select GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP select GENERIC_SCHED_CLOCK + select HAVE_ARCH_HASH select HAVE_ARCH_KGDB select HAVE_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK select HAVE_DMA_API_DEBUG diff --git a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/hash.h b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/hash.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..753513ae8cb0 --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/hash.h @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ +#ifndef _ASM_HASH_H +#define _ASM_HASH_H + +/* + * Fortunately, most people who want to run Linux on Microblaze enable + * both multiplier and barrel shifter, but omitting them is technically + * a supported configuration. + * + * With just a barrel shifter, we can implement an efficient constant + * multiply using shifts and adds. GCC can find a 9-step solution, but + * this 6-step solution was found by Yevgen Voronenko's implementation + * of the Hcub algorithm at http://spiral.ece.cmu.edu/mcm/gen.html. + * + * That software is really not designed for a single multiplier this large, + * but if you run it enough times with different seeds, it'll find several + * 6-shift, 6-add sequences for computing x * 0x61C88647. They are all + * c = (x << 19) + x; + * a = (x << 9) + c; + * b = (x << 23) + a; + * return (a<<11) + (b<<6) + (c<<3) - b; + * with variations on the order of the final add. + * + * Without even a shifter, it's hopless; any hash function will suck. + */ + +#if CONFIG_XILINX_MICROBLAZE0_USE_HW_MUL == 0 + +#define HAVE_ARCH__HASH_32 1 + +/* Multiply by GOLDEN_RATIO_32 = 0x61C88647 */ +static inline u32 __attribute_const__ __hash_32(u32 a) +{ +#if CONFIG_XILINX_MICROBLAZE0_USE_BARREL + unsigned int b, c; + + /* Phase 1: Compute three intermediate values */ + b = a << 23; + c = (a << 19) + a; + a = (a << 9) + c; + b += a; + + /* Phase 2: Compute (a << 11) + (b << 6) + (c << 3) - b */ + a <<= 5; + a += b; /* (a << 5) + b */ + a <<= 3; + a += c; /* (a << 8) + (b << 3) + c */ + a <<= 3; + return a - b; /* (a << 11) + (b << 6) + (c << 3) - b */ +#else + /* + * "This is really going to hurt." + * + * Without a barrel shifter, left shifts are implemented as + * repeated additions, and the best we can do is an optimal + * addition-subtraction chain. This one is not known to be + * optimal, but at 37 steps, it's decent for a 31-bit multiplier. + * + * Question: given its size (37*4 = 148 bytes per instance), + * and slowness, is this worth having inline? + */ + unsigned int b, c, d; + + b = a << 4; /* 4 */ + c = b << 1; /* 1 5 */ + b += a; /* 1 6 */ + c += b; /* 1 7 */ + c <<= 3; /* 3 10 */ + c -= a; /* 1 11 */ + d = c << 7; /* 7 18 */ + d += b; /* 1 19 */ + d <<= 8; /* 8 27 */ + d += a; /* 1 28 */ + d <<= 1; /* 1 29 */ + d += b; /* 1 30 */ + d <<= 6; /* 6 36 */ + return d + c; /* 1 37 total instructions*/ +#endif +} + +#endif /* !CONFIG_XILINX_MICROBLAZE0_USE_HW_MUL */ +#endif /* _ASM_HASH_H */ |