From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Cc: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: O_* bit numbers uniqueness check
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:20:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100106162004.GA11773@shareable.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <adahbqzvhgn.fsf@roland-alpha.cisco.com>
Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> > + /* please add new bits here to ensure allocation uniqueness */
> > + BUG_ON(20 != hweight32(
> > + O_RDONLY | O_WRONLY | O_RDWR |
>
> I wonder if there's a way to make this BUILD_BUG_ON(), so the problem is
> caught at compile time (a change like adding an O_ flag is often compile
> tested only for obscure archs). One could create a compile-time
> macro-ized version of hweight32() and use that, I guess, although I'm
> not sure it's worth the ugliness.
Not ugly at all:
#define hweight32(x) __builtin_popcount(x)
Checked GCC 3.4.3 / 4.1 / 4.4: It expands as a compile-time constant
if the argument is a compile-time constant, so can be used in
BUILD_BUG_ON() and even for array sizes etc.
If GCC's __builtin_popcount() isn't good enough for non-constant
values, the macro would be more involved:
#define hweight32(x) (__builtin_constant_p(x) ? __builtin_popcount(x) \
: hweight32_nonconstant(x))
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-06 16:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-06 6:55 [PATCH] fs: O_* bit numbers uniqueness check Wu Fengguang
2010-01-06 7:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-06 7:20 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-01-06 9:13 ` Andreas Schwab
2010-01-09 13:33 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-01-06 7:08 ` Roland Dreier
2010-01-06 7:18 ` [PATCH v2] " Wu Fengguang
2010-01-06 7:30 ` Roland Dreier
2010-01-06 7:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2010-01-06 16:20 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2010-01-09 13:44 ` [PATCH] " Wu Fengguang
2010-01-06 15:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-01-09 13:52 ` Wu Fengguang
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=20100106162004.GA11773@shareable.org \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).