All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: Milind Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 08:56:37 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45DEAC45.7090105@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3b44d3fb0702230014x4ee4a1dewdc624c54b3635e15@mail.gmail.com>

Milind Choudhary wrote:
> Hi all
>     working towards the cleanup of BIT macro,
> I've added one to <linux/bitops.h> & cleaned some obvious users.
>
> include/linux/input.h also has a BIT macro
> which does a wrap
> so currently i've done something like
>
> +#undef BIT
> #define BIT(nr)        (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
>
> Is it advisible to move this macro to bitops.h with some other name
>
> +#define BITWRAP(nr)    (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
>
> & make the whole input subsystem use it
> The change is huge, more than 125 files using input.h
> & almost all use the BIT macro.
It is as a big of change, but have you dismissed the "BIT(nr % 
BITS_PER_LONG)" approach?
I really think this has to be broken down into a patch-set.

<snip>
> diff --git a/fs/select.c b/fs/select.c
> index fe0893a..4bbe8ed 100644
> --- a/fs/select.c
> +++ b/fs/select.c
> @@ -180,7 +180,6 @@ get_max:
>        return max;
> }
>
> -#define BIT(i)         (1UL << ((i)&(__NFDBITS-1)))
Are you sure you can just delete this one?

<snip>
> diff --git a/include/linux/input.h b/include/linux/input.h
> index bde65c8..e4203d1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/input.h
> +++ b/include/linux/input.h
> @@ -908,9 +908,11 @@ struct ff_effect {
> #include <linux/fs.h>
> #include <linux/timer.h>
> #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> +//#include <linux/bitops.h>
You added and commented it out?
>
> #define NBITS(x) (((x)/BITS_PER_LONG)+1)
> -#define BIT(x) (1UL<<((x)%BITS_PER_LONG))
> +#undef BIT
> +#define BIT(nr)        (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
Why did you change x to nr? The other defines seems to use x.
> #define LONG(x) ((x)/BITS_PER_LONG)
>
> #define INPUT_KEYCODE(dev, scancode) ((dev->keycodesize = 1) ?
> ((u8*)dev->keycode)[scancode] : \
> diff --git a/include/video/sstfb.h b/include/video/sstfb.h
> index baa163f..b52f073 100644
> --- a/include/video/sstfb.h
> +++ b/include/video/sstfb.h
> @@ -68,7 +68,6 @@
> #  define print_var(X,Y...)
> #endif
>
> -#define BIT(x)         (1ul<<(x))
> #define POW2(x)                (1ul<<(x))
Maybe you can clean up POW2 as well (or define it as "#define POW2(x) 
BIT(x)")

Also, it seems your mail-client swapped the tabs to spaces (aka not able 
to apply).

Other then what I have commented on, it looks good.

Richard Knutsson

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: Milind Choudhary <milindchoudhary@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:56:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45DEAC45.7090105@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3b44d3fb0702230014x4ee4a1dewdc624c54b3635e15@mail.gmail.com>

Milind Choudhary wrote:
> Hi all
>     working towards the cleanup of BIT macro,
> I've added one to <linux/bitops.h> & cleaned some obvious users.
>
> include/linux/input.h also has a BIT macro
> which does a wrap
> so currently i've done something like
>
> +#undef BIT
> #define BIT(nr)        (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
>
> Is it advisible to move this macro to bitops.h with some other name
>
> +#define BITWRAP(nr)    (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
>
> & make the whole input subsystem use it
> The change is huge, more than 125 files using input.h
> & almost all use the BIT macro.
It is as a big of change, but have you dismissed the "BIT(nr % 
BITS_PER_LONG)" approach?
I really think this has to be broken down into a patch-set.

<snip>
> diff --git a/fs/select.c b/fs/select.c
> index fe0893a..4bbe8ed 100644
> --- a/fs/select.c
> +++ b/fs/select.c
> @@ -180,7 +180,6 @@ get_max:
>        return max;
> }
>
> -#define BIT(i)         (1UL << ((i)&(__NFDBITS-1)))
Are you sure you can just delete this one?

<snip>
> diff --git a/include/linux/input.h b/include/linux/input.h
> index bde65c8..e4203d1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/input.h
> +++ b/include/linux/input.h
> @@ -908,9 +908,11 @@ struct ff_effect {
> #include <linux/fs.h>
> #include <linux/timer.h>
> #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> +//#include <linux/bitops.h>
You added and commented it out?
>
> #define NBITS(x) (((x)/BITS_PER_LONG)+1)
> -#define BIT(x) (1UL<<((x)%BITS_PER_LONG))
> +#undef BIT
> +#define BIT(nr)        (1UL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG))
Why did you change x to nr? The other defines seems to use x.
> #define LONG(x) ((x)/BITS_PER_LONG)
>
> #define INPUT_KEYCODE(dev, scancode) ((dev->keycodesize == 1) ?
> ((u8*)dev->keycode)[scancode] : \
> diff --git a/include/video/sstfb.h b/include/video/sstfb.h
> index baa163f..b52f073 100644
> --- a/include/video/sstfb.h
> +++ b/include/video/sstfb.h
> @@ -68,7 +68,6 @@
> #  define print_var(X,Y...)
> #endif
>
> -#define BIT(x)         (1ul<<(x))
> #define POW2(x)                (1ul<<(x))
Maybe you can clean up POW2 as well (or define it as "#define POW2(x) 
BIT(x)")

Also, it seems your mail-client swapped the tabs to spaces (aka not able 
to apply).

Other then what I have commented on, it looks good.

Richard Knutsson

  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-23  8:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <3b44d3fb0702222056k1d2a9b57q69a3555a09a9058e@mail.gmail.com>
2007-02-23  8:14 ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] BIT macro cleanup Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23  8:26   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23  8:56   ` Richard Knutsson [this message]
2007-02-23  8:56     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 10:15     ` Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 10:27       ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Choudhary
2007-02-23 14:10       ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:10         ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 14:57         ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 14:57           ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 16:08           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 16:08             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 17:05             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 17:05               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:15               ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 18:15                 ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 18:37                 ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 18:37                   ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 19:11                   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 19:11                     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 21:58                     ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 21:58                       ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-23 22:43                       ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-23 22:43                         ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 11:11                         ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 11:11                           ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 12:59                           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-24 12:59                             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25  3:39                             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-25  3:39                               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 19:11                           ` Milind Arun Choudhary
2007-02-24 19:23                             ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Milind Arun Choudhary
2007-02-25 15:45                             ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25 15:45                               ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Richard Knutsson
2007-02-25  3:37                           ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-25  3:37                             ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Dmitry Torokhov
2007-02-24 10:46   ` [KJ] [RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik
2007-02-24 10:46     ` [KJ][RFC][PATCH] " Vojtech Pavlik

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=45DEAC45.7090105@student.ltu.se \
    --to=ricknu-0@student.ltu.se \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=milindchoudhary@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.