From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/17] x86/common: Align cpu_caps_cleared and cpu_caps_set to unsigned long Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2019 13:44:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20190304124433.GE32477@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1551494711-213533-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1551494711-213533-2-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <461f162c-694f-2bb7-f9cb-55fa915434bc@redhat.com> <20190304101736.GC32477@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Fenghua Yu , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , H Peter Anvin , Dave Hansen , Ashok Raj , Ravi V Shankar , Xiaoyao Li , linux-kernel , x86 , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Paolo Bonzini Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 11:48:18AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > True that. On the other hand btsl/btrl is also one byte smaller if no > operand is %r8-%r15. Because then we loose the REX prefix, right. Now _that_ might actually be a reason to do that :-) > In any case, /me wonders if we should have a macro like > > #define DECLARE_LE_BITMAP(name,bits) \ > u32 name[DIV_ROUND_UP(bits, 32)] __aligned(sizeof(unsigned long)) s/u32/__le32/ To go in bitops/le.h, sure, if there's enough users.