All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
	Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] RISC-V: Optimize tlb flush path.
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:16:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190820071639.GA2335@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mvmo90kl34d.fsf@linux-m68k.org>

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:14:58AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Aug 19 2019, "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > This looks a little odd to m and assumes we never pass a size smaller
> > than PAGE_SIZE.  Whule that is probably true, why not something like:
> >
> > 	if (size < PAGE_SIZE && size != -1)
> 
> ITYM size <= PAGE_SIZE.  And since size is unsigned it cannot be == -1
> at the same time.

Yes, the <= was obvious, that's what you get for hacking up a demo
patch on the plan.  And true for the -1.  That being said I find the
-1 convention rather annoying, a ULONG_MAX in the callers would be
a lot more obvious.

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
	Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] RISC-V: Optimize tlb flush path.
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:16:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190820071639.GA2335@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mvmo90kl34d.fsf@linux-m68k.org>

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 09:14:58AM +0200, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Aug 19 2019, "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > This looks a little odd to m and assumes we never pass a size smaller
> > than PAGE_SIZE.  Whule that is probably true, why not something like:
> >
> > 	if (size < PAGE_SIZE && size != -1)
> 
> ITYM size <= PAGE_SIZE.  And since size is unsigned it cannot be == -1
> at the same time.

Yes, the <= was obvious, that's what you get for hacking up a demo
patch on the plan.  And true for the -1.  That being said I find the
-1 convention rather annoying, a ULONG_MAX in the callers would be
a lot more obvious.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-20  7:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-20  0:47 [v2 PATCH] RISC-V: Optimize tlb flush path Atish Patra
2019-08-20  0:47 ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20  3:06 ` hch
2019-08-20  3:06   ` hch
2019-08-20  7:14   ` Andreas Schwab
2019-08-20  7:14     ` Andreas Schwab
2019-08-20  7:16     ` hch [this message]
2019-08-20  7:16       ` hch
2019-08-20  7:46 ` Andreas Schwab
2019-08-20  7:46   ` Andreas Schwab
2019-08-20  8:42   ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20  8:42     ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20  8:51     ` Andreas Schwab
2019-08-20  8:51       ` Andreas Schwab
2019-08-20  9:22     ` hch
2019-08-20  9:22       ` hch
2019-08-20 20:28       ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20 20:28         ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20 22:18         ` hch
2019-08-20 22:18           ` hch
2019-08-20 22:24           ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20 22:24             ` Atish Patra
2019-08-21  1:29         ` Alan Kao
2019-08-21  1:29           ` Alan Kao
2019-08-21  1:40           ` hch
2019-08-21  1:40             ` hch
2019-08-21  3:52             ` Anup Patel
2019-08-21  3:52               ` Anup Patel
2019-08-21  7:18               ` hch
2019-08-21  7:18                 ` hch
2019-08-20  8:51 ` Anup Patel
2019-08-20  8:51   ` Anup Patel
2019-08-20 20:29   ` Atish Patra
2019-08-20 20:29     ` Atish Patra
2019-08-21 14:41     ` hch
2019-08-21 14:41       ` hch
2019-08-21 14:45 ` hch
2019-08-21 14:45   ` hch
2019-08-21 17:36   ` Atish Patra
2019-08-21 17:36     ` Atish Patra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190820071639.GA2335@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=allison@lohutok.net \
    --cc=anup@brainfault.org \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=atish.patra@wdc.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@sifive.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=schwab@linux-m68k.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.