From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To: mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@ursulin.net>,
David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@ffwll.ch>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/7] bits: Fixed-type GENMASK_U*() and BIT_U*()
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 12:18:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z8sqSpKZzfolKm8Q@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250308-fixed-type-genmasks-v6-0-f59315e73c29@wanadoo.fr>
No rush, please allow your reviewers a week or two before submitting
a new iteration unless you want to disregard the previous version for
some reason, of course. This will not get into the upcoming merge
window, anyways.
So, what should I do? Go through the v5 and all discussions in there,
or just jump on this?
On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 01:48:47AM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay wrote:
> Introduce some fixed width variant of the GENMASK() and the BIT()
> macros in bits.h. Note that the main goal is not to get the correct
> type, but rather to enforce more checks at compile time. For example:
>
> GENMASK_U16(16, 0)
>
> will raise a build bug.
>
> This series is a continuation of:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/intel-xe/20240208074521.577076-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
>
> from Lucas De Marchi. Above series is one year old. I really think
> that this was a good idea and I do not want this series to die. So I
> am volunteering to revive it.
>
> Meanwhile, many changes occurred in bits.h. The most significant
> change is that __GENMASK() was moved to the uapi headers.
>
> In v4 and onward, I introduce one big change: split the definition of
> the asm and non-asm GENMASK(). I think this is controversial.
> Especially, Yury commented that he did not want such split. So I
> initially implemented a first draft in which both the asm and non-asm
> version would rely on the same helper macro, i.e. adding this:
>
> #define __GENMASK_TYPE(t, w, h, l) \
> (((t)~_ULL(0) - ((t)1 << (l)) + 1) & \
> ((t)~_ULL(0) >> (w - 1 - (h))))
>
> to uapi/bits.h. And then, the different GENMASK()s would look like
> this:
>
> #define __GENMASK(h, l) __GENMASK_TYPE(unsigned long, __BITS_PER_LONG, h, l)
>
> and so on.
>
> I implemented it, and the final result looks quite ugly. Not only do
> we need to manually provide the width each time, the biggest concern
> is that adding this to the uapi is asking for trouble. Who knows how
> people are going to use this? And once it is in the uapi, there is
> virtually no way back.
>
> Adding to this, that macro can not even be generalized to u128
> integers, whereas after the split, it is.
>
> Finally, I do not think it makes sense to expose the fixed width
> variants to the asm. The fixed width integers type are a C
> concept. For asm, the long and long long variants seems sufficient.
>
> And so, after implementing both, the asm and non-asm split seems way
> more clean and I think this is the best compromise. Let me know what
> you think :)
>
> As requested, here are the bloat-o-meter stats:
>
> $ ./scripts/bloat-o-meter vmlinux_before.o vmlinux_after.o
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 4/2 up/down: 5/-4 (1)
> Function old new delta
> intel_psr_invalidate 666 668 +2
> mst_stream_compute_config 1652 1653 +1
> intel_psr_flush 977 978 +1
> intel_dp_compute_link_config 1327 1328 +1
> cfg80211_inform_bss_data 5109 5108 -1
> intel_drrs_activate 379 376 -3
> Total: Before=22723481, After=22723482, chg +0.00%
>
> (done with GCC 12.4.1 on an x86_64 defconfig)
>
> --
> 2.43.0
>
> ---
> Changes from v5:
>
> - Update the cover letter message. I was still refering to
> GENMASK_t() instead of GENMASK_TYPE().
>
> - Add a comment in the cover letter to explain that a common
> GENMASK_TYPE() for C and asm wouldn't allow to generate the u128
> variant.
>
> - Restore the comment saying that BUILD_BUG_ON() is not available in
> asm code.
>
> - Add a FIXME message to highlight the absence of the asm GENMASK*()
> unit tests.
>
> - Use git's histogram diff algorithm
>
> - Link to v5: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250306-fixed-type-genmasks-v5-0-b443e9dcba63@wanadoo.fr
>
> Changes from v4:
>
> - Rebase on https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/bitmap-for-next
>
> - Rename GENMASK_t() to GENMASK_TYPE()
>
> - First patch of v4 (the typo fix 'init128' -> 'int128') is removed
> because it was resent separately in:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250305-fix_init128_typo-v1-1-cbe5b8e54e7d@wanadoo.fr
>
> - Replace the (t)~ULL(0) by type_max(t). This way, GENMASK_TYPE()
> can now be used to generate GENMASK_U128().
>
> - Get rid of the unsigned int cast for the U8 and U16 variants.
>
> - Add the BIT_TYPE() helper macro.
>
> - Link to v4: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250305-fixed-type-genmasks-v4-0-1873dcdf6723@wanadoo.fr
>
> Changes from v3:
>
> - Rebase on v6.14-rc5
>
> - Fix a typo in GENMASK_U128() comment.
>
> - Split the asm and non-asm definition of
>
> - Replace ~0ULL by ~ULL(0)
>
> - Since v3, __GENMASK() was moved to the uapi and people started
> using directly. Introduce GENMASK_t() instead.
>
> - Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/intel-xe/20240208074521.577076-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
>
> Changes from v2:
>
> - Document both in commit message and code about the strict type
> checking and give examples how it´d break with invalid params.
>
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/intel-xe/20240124050205.3646390-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
>
> Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/intel-xe/20230509051403.2748545-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
>
> ---
> Lucas De Marchi (3):
> bits: introduce fixed-type BIT_U*()
> drm/i915: Convert REG_GENMASK*() to fixed-width GENMASK_U*()
> test_bits: add tests for GENMASK_U*()
>
> Vincent Mailhol (3):
> bits: split the definition of the asm and non-asm GENMASK()
> test_bits: add tests for __GENMASK() and __GENMASK_ULL()
> test_bits: add tests for BIT_U*()
>
> Yury Norov (1):
> bits: introduce fixed-type genmasks
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reg_defs.h | 108 ++++-------------------------------
> include/linux/bitops.h | 1 -
> include/linux/bits.h | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++---------
> lib/test_bits.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 125 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: 0312e94abe484b9ee58c32d2f8ba177e04955b35
> change-id: 20250228-fixed-type-genmasks-8d1a555f34e8
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-07 17:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-07 16:48 [PATCH v6 0/7] bits: Fixed-type GENMASK_U*() and BIT_U*() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] bits: split the definition of the asm and non-asm GENMASK() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 17:42 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-08 9:10 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-18 16:06 ` Yury Norov
2025-03-18 16:14 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] bits: introduce fixed-type genmasks Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 17:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-18 16:45 ` Yury Norov
2025-03-19 5:39 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-19 13:24 ` Yury Norov
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] bits: introduce fixed-type BIT_U*() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 17:48 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-07 17:49 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-08 9:28 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] drm/i915: Convert REG_GENMASK*() to fixed-width GENMASK_U*() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 17:54 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-08 10:36 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-18 17:16 ` Yury Norov
2025-03-18 22:32 ` Jani Nikula
2025-03-19 4:37 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-19 13:25 ` Yury Norov
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] test_bits: add tests for __GENMASK() and __GENMASK_ULL() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] test_bits: add tests for GENMASK_U*() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 16:48 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] test_bits: add tests for BIT_U*() Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-07 16:48 ` Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay
2025-03-07 17:18 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2025-03-07 17:43 ` [PATCH v6 0/7] bits: Fixed-type GENMASK_U*() and BIT_U*() Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-07 17:48 ` Yury Norov
2025-03-07 17:50 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-08 10:40 ` Vincent Mailhol
2025-03-10 14:20 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for " Patchwork
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=Z8sqSpKZzfolKm8Q@thinkpad \
--to=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi.shyti@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tursulin@ursulin.net \
/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.