bpf: jit: s390 64/32 bits for index in tail call
Hi!
I have a question about 6651ee070b3124fe9b9db383e3a895a0e4aded65
```
With this patch a tail call generates the following code on s390x:
if (index >= array->map.max_entries)
goto out
000003ff8001c7e4: e31030100016 llgf %r1,16(%r3)
000003ff8001c7ea: ec41001fa065 clgrj %r4,%r1,10,3ff8001c828
```Do I understand corretly, that it uses 64 bit index value?
"runtime/jit: pass > 32bit index to tail_call" test_verifier's test fails for me and I see, for example, /* mov edx, edx */ in the x86 implementation
Signature · 2 lines
WBR, Yauheni Kaliuta
Quoted 9 lines
```
With this patch a tail call generates the following code on s390x:
if (index >= array->map.max_entries)
goto out
000003ff8001c7e4: e31030100016 llgf %r1,16(%r3)
000003ff8001c7ea: ec41001fa065 clgrj %r4,%r1,10,3ff8001c828
```Quoted 5 lines
Do I understand corretly, that it uses 64 bit index value?
"runtime/jit: pass > 32bit index to
tail_call" test_verifier's test fails for me and I see, for example, /* mov edx, edx */ in the x86 implementation
Hi Yauheni,
llgf zero-extends a 32-bit value and puts it into a register, so I would expect index to be a 32-bit value here. This test passes for me:
#752/u runtime/jit: pass > 32bit index to tail_call OK #752/p runtime/jit: pass > 32bit index to tail_call OK
Which machine are you using for testing? I tried that on z14 (3906).
Best regards,
Ilya