From: Syed Nayyar Waris <syednwaris@gmail.com>
To: arnd@kernel.org, vilhelm.gray@gmail.com
Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 4/4] gpio: xilinx: Utilize generic bitmap_get_value and _set_value
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 03:30:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201110220004.GA25801@syed> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201110174316.GA12192@shinobu>
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:43:16PM -0500, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:52:42PM +0530, Syed Nayyar Waris wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 6:05 PM William Breathitt Gray
> > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:02:43AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 09. 11. 20 18:31, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 07:22:20PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > >> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 12:11:40PM -0500, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> > > > >>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 10:15:29PM +0530, Syed Nayyar Waris wrote:
> > > > >>>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:41:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>> static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map,
> > > > >>>> - unsigned long value,
> > > > >>>> + unsigned long value, const size_t length,
> > > > >>>> unsigned long start, unsigned long nbits)
> > > > >>>> {
> > > > >>>> const size_t index = BIT_WORD(start);
> > > > >>>> @@ -15,6 +15,10 @@ static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map,
> > > > >>>> } else {
> > > > >>>> map[index + 0] &= ~BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK(start);
> > > > >>>> map[index + 0] |= value << offset;
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>> + if (index + 1 >= length)
> > > > >>>> + __builtin_unreachable();
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>> map[index + 1] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(start + nbits);
> > > > >>>> map[index + 1] |= value >> space;
> > > > >>>> }
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Hi Syed,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Let's rename 'length' to 'nbits' as Arnd suggested, and rename 'nbits'
> > > > >>> to value_width.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> length here is in longs. I guess this is the point of entire patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah yes, this should become 'const unsigned long nbits' and represent the
> > > > > length of the bitmap in bits and not longs.
> >
> > Hi William, Andy and All,
> >
> > Thank You for reviewing. I was looking into the review comments and I
> > have a question on the above.
> >
> > Actually, in bitmap_set_value(), the intended comparison is to be made
> > between 'index + 1' and 'length' (which is now renamed as 'nbits').
> > That is, the comparison would look-like as follows:
> > if (index + 1 >= nbits)
> >
> > The 'index' is getting populated with BIT_WORD(start).
> > The 'index' variable in above is the actual index of the bitmap array,
> > while in previous mail it is suggested to use 'nbits' which represent
> > the length of the bitmap in bits and not longs.
> >
> > Isn't it comparing two different things? index of array (not the
> > bit-wise-length) on left hand side and nbits (bit-wise-length) on
> > right hand side?
> >
> > Have I misunderstood something? If yes, request to clarify.
> >
> > Or do I have to first divide 'nbits' by BITS_PER_LONG and then compare
> > it with 'index + 1'? Something like this?
> >
> > Regards
> > Syed Nayyar Waris
>
> The array elements of the bitmap memory region are abstracted away for
> the covenience of the users of the bitmap_* functions; the driver
> authors are able to treat their bitmaps as just a set of contiguous bits
> and not worry about where the division between array elements happen.
>
> So to match the interface of the other bitmap_* functions, you should
> take in nbits and figure out the actual array length by dividing by
> BITS_PER_LONG inside bitmap_set_value(). Then you can use your
> conditional check (index + 1 >= length) like you have been doing so far.
>
> William Breathitt Gray
Hi Arnd,
Sharing a new version of bitmap_set_value(). Let me know if it looks
good and whether it suppresses the compiler warning.
The below patch is created against the v12 version of bitmap_set_value().
-static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map,
- unsigned long value,
- unsigned long start, unsigned long nbits)
+static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map, unsigned long nbits,
+ unsigned long value, unsigned long value_width,
+ unsigned long start)
{
- const size_t index = BIT_WORD(start);
+ const unsigned long index = BIT_WORD(start);
+ const unsigned long length = BIT_WORD(nbits);
const unsigned long offset = start % BITS_PER_LONG;
const unsigned long ceiling = round_up(start + 1, BITS_PER_LONG);
const unsigned long space = ceiling - start;
- value &= GENMASK(nbits - 1, 0);
+ value &= GENMASK(value_width - 1, 0);
- if (space >= nbits) {
- map[index] &= ~(GENMASK(nbits - 1, 0) << offset);
+ if (space >= value_width) {
+ map[index] &= ~(GENMASK(value_width - 1, 0) << offset);
map[index] |= value << offset;
} else {
map[index + 0] &= ~BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK(start);
map[index + 0] |= value << offset;
- map[index + 1] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(start + nbits);
+
+ if (index + 1 >= length)
+ __builtin_unreachable();
+
+ map[index + 1] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(start + value_width);
map[index + 1] |= value >> space;
}
}
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Syed Nayyar Waris <syednwaris@gmail.com>
To: arnd@kernel.org, vilhelm.gray@gmail.com
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 4/4] gpio: xilinx: Utilize generic bitmap_get_value and _set_value
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 03:30:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201110220004.GA25801@syed> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201110174316.GA12192@shinobu>
On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:43:16PM -0500, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 10:52:42PM +0530, Syed Nayyar Waris wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 6:05 PM William Breathitt Gray
> > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:02:43AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 09. 11. 20 18:31, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 07:22:20PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > >> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 12:11:40PM -0500, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> > > > >>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 10:15:29PM +0530, Syed Nayyar Waris wrote:
> > > > >>>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 03:41:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>> static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map,
> > > > >>>> - unsigned long value,
> > > > >>>> + unsigned long value, const size_t length,
> > > > >>>> unsigned long start, unsigned long nbits)
> > > > >>>> {
> > > > >>>> const size_t index = BIT_WORD(start);
> > > > >>>> @@ -15,6 +15,10 @@ static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map,
> > > > >>>> } else {
> > > > >>>> map[index + 0] &= ~BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK(start);
> > > > >>>> map[index + 0] |= value << offset;
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>> + if (index + 1 >= length)
> > > > >>>> + __builtin_unreachable();
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>> map[index + 1] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(start + nbits);
> > > > >>>> map[index + 1] |= value >> space;
> > > > >>>> }
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Hi Syed,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Let's rename 'length' to 'nbits' as Arnd suggested, and rename 'nbits'
> > > > >>> to value_width.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> length here is in longs. I guess this is the point of entire patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah yes, this should become 'const unsigned long nbits' and represent the
> > > > > length of the bitmap in bits and not longs.
> >
> > Hi William, Andy and All,
> >
> > Thank You for reviewing. I was looking into the review comments and I
> > have a question on the above.
> >
> > Actually, in bitmap_set_value(), the intended comparison is to be made
> > between 'index + 1' and 'length' (which is now renamed as 'nbits').
> > That is, the comparison would look-like as follows:
> > if (index + 1 >= nbits)
> >
> > The 'index' is getting populated with BIT_WORD(start).
> > The 'index' variable in above is the actual index of the bitmap array,
> > while in previous mail it is suggested to use 'nbits' which represent
> > the length of the bitmap in bits and not longs.
> >
> > Isn't it comparing two different things? index of array (not the
> > bit-wise-length) on left hand side and nbits (bit-wise-length) on
> > right hand side?
> >
> > Have I misunderstood something? If yes, request to clarify.
> >
> > Or do I have to first divide 'nbits' by BITS_PER_LONG and then compare
> > it with 'index + 1'? Something like this?
> >
> > Regards
> > Syed Nayyar Waris
>
> The array elements of the bitmap memory region are abstracted away for
> the covenience of the users of the bitmap_* functions; the driver
> authors are able to treat their bitmaps as just a set of contiguous bits
> and not worry about where the division between array elements happen.
>
> So to match the interface of the other bitmap_* functions, you should
> take in nbits and figure out the actual array length by dividing by
> BITS_PER_LONG inside bitmap_set_value(). Then you can use your
> conditional check (index + 1 >= length) like you have been doing so far.
>
> William Breathitt Gray
Hi Arnd,
Sharing a new version of bitmap_set_value(). Let me know if it looks
good and whether it suppresses the compiler warning.
The below patch is created against the v12 version of bitmap_set_value().
-static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map,
- unsigned long value,
- unsigned long start, unsigned long nbits)
+static inline void bitmap_set_value(unsigned long *map, unsigned long nbits,
+ unsigned long value, unsigned long value_width,
+ unsigned long start)
{
- const size_t index = BIT_WORD(start);
+ const unsigned long index = BIT_WORD(start);
+ const unsigned long length = BIT_WORD(nbits);
const unsigned long offset = start % BITS_PER_LONG;
const unsigned long ceiling = round_up(start + 1, BITS_PER_LONG);
const unsigned long space = ceiling - start;
- value &= GENMASK(nbits - 1, 0);
+ value &= GENMASK(value_width - 1, 0);
- if (space >= nbits) {
- map[index] &= ~(GENMASK(nbits - 1, 0) << offset);
+ if (space >= value_width) {
+ map[index] &= ~(GENMASK(value_width - 1, 0) << offset);
map[index] |= value << offset;
} else {
map[index + 0] &= ~BITMAP_FIRST_WORD_MASK(start);
map[index + 0] |= value << offset;
- map[index + 1] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(start + nbits);
+
+ if (index + 1 >= length)
+ __builtin_unreachable();
+
+ map[index + 1] &= ~BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(start + value_width);
map[index + 1] |= value >> space;
}
}
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-10 22:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-18 21:37 [PATCH v12 0/4] Introduce the for_each_set_clump macro Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-10-18 21:37 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-10-18 21:38 ` [PATCH v12 1/4] bitops: " Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-10-18 21:39 ` [PATCH v12 2/4] lib/test_bitmap.c: Add for_each_set_clump test cases Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-10-18 21:40 ` [PATCH v12 3/4] gpio: thunderx: Utilize for_each_set_clump macro Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-05 9:10 ` Linus Walleij
2020-10-18 21:41 ` [PATCH v12 4/4] gpio: xilinx: Utilize generic bitmap_get_value and _set_value Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-10-18 21:41 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-10-29 22:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-10-29 22:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-01 15:00 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-01 15:00 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-01 20:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-01 20:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-09 12:34 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-09 12:34 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-09 13:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-09 13:13 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-09 13:41 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 13:41 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 14:38 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 14:38 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 14:48 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-09 14:48 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-09 15:18 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 15:18 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 14:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-09 14:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-09 16:45 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-09 16:45 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-09 17:11 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 17:11 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 17:22 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-11-09 17:22 ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-11-09 17:31 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-09 17:31 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-10 10:02 ` Michal Simek
2020-11-10 10:02 ` Michal Simek
2020-11-10 12:35 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-10 12:35 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-10 17:22 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-10 17:22 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-10 17:43 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-10 17:43 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-10 22:00 ` Syed Nayyar Waris [this message]
2020-11-10 22:00 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-13 16:52 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-13 16:52 ` Syed Nayyar Waris
2020-11-20 13:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-20 13:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-11-20 13:45 ` William Breathitt Gray
2020-11-20 13:45 ` William Breathitt Gray
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=20201110220004.GA25801@syed \
--to=syednwaris@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.simek@xilinx.com \
--cc=vilhelm.gray@gmail.com \
/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.