81 lines
2.3 KiB
C
81 lines
2.3 KiB
C
#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 */
|