[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [XEN PATCH v2] arm64/vfp: address MISRA C:2012 Dir 4.3
On 24/08/2023 10:01, Michal Orzel wrote: Hi Nicola, On 24/08/2023 09:37, Nicola Vetrini wrote:Directive 4.3 prescribes the following: "Assembly language shall be encapsulated and isolated", on the grounds of improved readability and ease of maintenance. A static inline function is the chosen encapsulation mechanism. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Changes in v2: - Switched to a static inline function ---xen/arch/arm/arm64/vfp.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/arm64/vfp.c b/xen/arch/arm/arm64/vfp.c index 2d0d7c2e6ddb..5c884380ee42 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/arm64/vfp.c +++ b/xen/arch/arm/arm64/vfp.c @@ -4,6 +4,48 @@ #include <asm/vfp.h> #include <asm/arm64/sve.h> +static inline void save_state(uint64_t *fpregs) +{ + asm volatile("stp q0, q1, [%1, #16 * 0]\n\t" + "stp q2, q3, [%1, #16 * 2]\n\t" + "stp q4, q5, [%1, #16 * 4]\n\t" + "stp q6, q7, [%1, #16 * 6]\n\t" + "stp q8, q9, [%1, #16 * 8]\n\t" + "stp q10, q11, [%1, #16 * 10]\n\t" + "stp q12, q13, [%1, #16 * 12]\n\t" + "stp q14, q15, [%1, #16 * 14]\n\t" + "stp q16, q17, [%1, #16 * 16]\n\t" + "stp q18, q19, [%1, #16 * 18]\n\t" + "stp q20, q21, [%1, #16 * 20]\n\t" + "stp q22, q23, [%1, #16 * 22]\n\t" + "stp q24, q25, [%1, #16 * 24]\n\t" + "stp q26, q27, [%1, #16 * 26]\n\t" + "stp q28, q29, [%1, #16 * 28]\n\t" + "stp q30, q31, [%1, #16 * 30]\n\t" + : "=Q" (*fpregs) : "r" (fpregs)); +} + +static inline void restore_state(uint64_t *fpregs)This can be const as you are loading data from fpregs into registers I wonder whether this would make a difference, given that the return type is void. It's fine either way, tough. -- Nicola Vetrini, BSc Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |