我为Project Euler Q14编写了这两个解决方案,在汇编和C++中.它们是用于测试Collatz猜想的相同蛮力方法.装配解决方案与组装
nasm -felf64 p14.asm && gcc p14.o -o p14
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
C++是用.编译的
g++ p14.cpp -o p14
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
部件, p14.asm
section .data
fmt db "%d", 10, 0
global main
extern printf
section .text
main:
mov rcx, 1000000
xor rdi, rdi ; max i
xor rsi, rsi ; i
l1:
dec rcx
xor r10, r10 ; count
mov rax, rcx
l2:
test rax, 1
jpe even
mov rbx, 3
mul rbx
inc rax
jmp c1
even:
mov rbx, 2 …
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud) LOOP(英特尔参考手动输入)递减ecx/rcx,然后如果非零则跳转.这很慢,但是英特尔不能廉价地把它变得很快吗? dec/jnz
已经将宏观融合成 Sandybridge家族的一个 uop; 唯一的区别是设置标志.
loop
关于各种微体系结构,来自Agner Fog的说明表:
Bulldozer-family/Ryzen:1 m-op(与宏观融合测试和分支相同,或者jecxz
)
P4:4次(相同jecxz
)
loope
/ loopne
).吞吐量= 4c(loop
)或7c(loope/ne
).loope
/ loopne
). 吞吐量=每5个循环一个,这是将循环计数器保留在内存中的瓶颈!jecxz
只有2 uops,吞吐量与普通吞吐量相同jcc
难道解码器不能像lea rcx, [rcx-1]
/ 那样解码jrcxz
吗?这将是3 uops.至少那是没有地址大小前缀的情况,否则它必须使用ecx
和截断RIP
,EIP
如果跳转; 也许奇怪的地址大小选择控制减量的宽度解释了许多uops?
或者更好,只需将其解码为不设置标志的融合分支和分支? dec ecx …
我正在使用gcc
(Ubuntu 4.4.1-4ubuntu9)来编译我正在编写的程序,但只要它在我的代码中看到//注释就会呕吐,说:
interface.c :##: error: expected expression before â/â token<
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
gcc
我使用的编译模式是否禁止//
评论?
$ gcc -g -ansi -pedantic interface.c structs.h -c -I. -I/home/me/project/h
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
为什么?
我希望能够%rbp
在内联asm中使用基指针寄存器().这样的玩具示例是这样的:
void Foo(int &x)
{
asm volatile ("pushq %%rbp;" // 'prologue'
"movq %%rsp, %%rbp;" // 'prologue'
"subq $12, %%rsp;" // make room
"movl $5, -12(%%rbp);" // some asm instruction
"movq %%rbp, %%rsp;" // 'epilogue'
"popq %%rbp;" // 'epilogue'
: : : );
x = 5;
}
int main()
{
int x;
Foo(x);
return 0;
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
我希望,因为我使用通常的序幕/结尾函数调用方法来推送和弹出旧的%rbp
,这样就可以了.但是,当我尝试在内x
联asm之后访问时,它会出现故障.
GCC生成的汇编代码(略微剥离)是:
_Foo:
pushq %rbp
movq %rsp, %rbp
movq %rdi, -8(%rbp)
# INLINEASM
pushq %rbp; // prologue
movq %rsp, …
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud) write(1,"hi",3)
在linux上反汇编,gcc -s -nostdlib -nostartfiles -O3
结果如下:
ba03000000 mov edx, 3 ; thanks for the correction jester!
bf01000000 mov edi, 1
31c0 xor eax, eax
e9d8ffffff jmp loc.imp.write
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
我不是到编译器的开发,但由于移动到这些寄存器的每一个值是恒定的和已知的编译时间,我很好奇,为什么不GCC使用dl
,dil
和al
来代替.也许有人会说,此功能不会让任何性能上的差异,但有一个在之间的可执行文件的大小有很大的区别mov $1, %rax => b801000000
,并mov $1, %al => b001
当我们谈论数千寄存器的程序访问.如果软件的优雅部分不仅体积小,它确实会对性能产生影响.
有人可以解释为什么"海湾合作委员会决定"它无所谓?
假设我想在循环中迭代所有整数for
.为了便于讨论,假设我f(unsigned x)
为每个整数调用一些未知函数:
for (unsigned i = 0; i < UINT_MAX; i++) {
f(i);
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
当然,上面的代码无法遍历所有整数,因为它错过了一个:UINT_MAX.将条件更改为i <= UINT_MAX
仅导致无限循环,因为这是一个重言式.
你可以用do-while
循环来完成它,但是你会失去for
语法的所有细节.
我可以吃蛋糕(for
循环)并吃掉它(迭代所有整数)吗?
我正在学习用DOS和内联汇编在DOS下做一些低级VGA编程.现在我正在尝试创建一个在屏幕上打印出一个角色的功能.
这是我的代码:
//This is the characters BITMAPS
uint8_t characters[464] = {
0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x00,0x20,0x00,0x50,
0x50,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x50,0xf8,0x50,0x50,0xf8,0x50,0x00,0x20,0xf8,0xa0,
0xf8,0x28,0xf8,0x00,0xc8,0xd0,0x20,0x20,0x58,0x98,0x00,0x40,0xa0,0x40,0xa8,0x90,
0x68,0x00,0x20,0x40,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x20,0x40,0x40,0x40,0x40,0x20,0x00,
0x20,0x10,0x10,0x10,0x10,0x20,0x00,0x50,0x20,0xf8,0x20,0x50,0x00,0x00,0x20,0x20,
0xf8,0x20,0x20,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x60,0x20,0x40,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xf8,0x00,
0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x60,0x60,0x00,0x00,0x08,0x10,0x20,0x40,0x80,
0x00,0x70,0x88,0x98,0xa8,0xc8,0x70,0x00,0x20,0x60,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x70,0x00,0x70,
0x88,0x08,0x70,0x80,0xf8,0x00,0xf8,0x10,0x30,0x08,0x88,0x70,0x00,0x20,0x40,0x90,
0x90,0xf8,0x10,0x00,0xf8,0x80,0xf0,0x08,0x88,0x70,0x00,0x70,0x80,0xf0,0x88,0x88,
0x70,0x00,0xf8,0x08,0x10,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x70,0x88,0x88,0x70,0x00,
0x70,0x88,0x88,0x78,0x08,0x70,0x00,0x30,0x30,0x00,0x00,0x30,0x30,0x00,0x30,0x30,
0x00,0x30,0x10,0x20,0x00,0x00,0x10,0x20,0x40,0x20,0x10,0x00,0x00,0xf8,0x00,0xf8,
0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x20,0x10,0x08,0x10,0x20,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x10,0x20,0x00,0x20,
0x00,0x70,0x90,0xa8,0xb8,0x80,0x70,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x88,0xf8,0x88,0x88,0x00,0xf0,
0x88,0xf0,0x88,0x88,0xf0,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x80,0x80,0x88,0x70,0x00,0xe0,0x90,0x88,
0x88,0x90,0xe0,0x00,0xf8,0x80,0xf0,0x80,0x80,0xf8,0x00,0xf8,0x80,0xf0,0x80,0x80,
0x80,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x80,0x98,0x88,0x70,0x00,0x88,0x88,0xf8,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x00,
0x70,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x70,0x00,0x10,0x10,0x10,0x10,0x90,0x60,0x00,0x90,0xa0,
0xc0,0xa0,0x90,0x88,0x00,0x80,0x80,0x80,0x80,0x80,0xf8,0x00,0x88,0xd8,0xa8,0x88,
0x88,0x88,0x00,0x88,0xc8,0xa8,0x98,0x88,0x88,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x70,
0x00,0xf0,0x88,0x88,0xf0,0x80,0x80,0x00,0x70,0x88,0x88,0xa8,0x98,0x70,0x00,0xf0,
0x88,0x88,0xf0,0x90,0x88,0x00,0x70,0x80,0x70,0x08,0x88,0x70,0x00,0xf8,0x20,0x20,
0x20,0x20,0x20,0x00,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x70,0x00,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x88,0x50,
0x20,0x00,0x88,0x88,0x88,0xa8,0xa8,0x50,0x00,0x88,0x50,0x20,0x20,0x50,0x88,0x00,
0x88,0x50,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x20,0x00,0xf8,0x10,0x20,0x40,0x80,0xf8,0x00,0x60,0x40,
0x40,0x40,0x40,0x60,0x00,0x00,0x80,0x40,0x20,0x10,0x08,0x00,0x30,0x10,0x10,0x10,
0x10,0x30,0x00,0x20,0x50,0x88,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0xf8,
0x00,0xf8,0xf8,0xf8,0xf8,0xf8,0xf8};
/**************************************************************************
* put_char *
* Print char *
**************************************************************************/
void put_char(int x ,int y,int ascii_char ,byte color){
__asm__(
"push %si\n\t"
"push %di\n\t"
"push %cx\n\t"
"mov color,%dl\n\t" //test color
"mov ascii_char,%al\n\t" //test char
"sub $32,%al\n\t"
"mov $7,%ah\n\t"
"mul %ah\n\t"
"lea $characters,%si\n\t" …
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud) 我有这段代码在AMD64兼容CPU上运行Ubuntu 14.04时会出现段错误:
#include <inttypes.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
int main()
{
uint32_t sum = 0;
uint8_t *buffer = mmap(NULL, 1<<18, PROT_READ,
MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0);
uint16_t *p = (buffer + 1);
int i;
for (i=0;i<14;++i) {
//printf("%d\n", i);
sum += p[i];
}
return sum;
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
如果使用分配内存,则仅此段错误mmap
.如果我使用malloc
,堆栈上的缓冲区,或全局变量,它不会段错误.
如果我将循环的迭代次数减少到少于14的次数,则不再是段错误.如果我从循环内打印数组索引,它也不再是段错误.
为什么未对齐的内存访问能够访问未对齐地址的CPU上的段错误,为什么只有在这种特定情况下呢?