From: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
To: "Michael Walle" <mwalle@kernel.org>
Cc: "Pratyush Yadav" <pratyush@kernel.org>,
"Tudor Ambarus" <tudor.ambarus@linaro.org>,
"Miquel Raynal" <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
"Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>,
"Vignesh Raghavendra" <vigneshr@ti.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
<linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: replace unnecessary div64_u64() with div_u64()
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 16:42:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mafs0mspcb57t.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D0WNIVK1DBL5.3KQOD1K2O128P@kernel.org> (Michael Walle's message of "Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:47:13 +0200")
On Mon, Apr 29 2024, Michael Walle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon Apr 29, 2024 at 3:27 PM CEST, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 29 2024, Michael Walle wrote:
>>
>> > Both occurences of div64_u64() just have a u8 or u32 divisor. Use
>> > div_u64() instead.
>>
>> Does this improve performance or is this only for correctness?
>
> See function doc for div_u64():
>
> * This is the most common 64bit divide and should be used if possible,
> * as many 32bit archs can optimize this variant better than a full 64bit
> * divide.
Thanks. I think it would be good to add this to the commit message:
Both occurences of div64_u64() just have a u8 or u32 divisor. Use
div_u64() instead. Many 32 bit architectures can optimize this
variant better than a full 64 bit divide.
No need to resend, I can do this when applying.
>
>> Patch LGTM otherwise.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
>>
>> BTW, I also noticed that there is a do_div() call in spi_nor_write()
>> that also uses a u64 dividend and u32 divisor. I was wondering why it
>> uses do_div() and not div_u64() (I am not sure what the difference
>> between the two is) but I suppose it doesn't matter much since your
>> spring cleaning series will delete that code anyway.
>
> do_div() is a macro and is modifying the dividend in place, whereas
> div_u64() will return it. do_div() is using u32 for the divisor
> anyway.
>
> -michael
>
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-29 14:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-29 12:11 [PATCH] mtd: spi-nor: replace unnecessary div64_u64() with div_u64() Michael Walle
2024-04-29 13:27 ` Pratyush Yadav
2024-04-29 13:47 ` Michael Walle
2024-04-29 14:42 ` Pratyush Yadav [this message]
2024-04-30 15:45 ` Pratyush Yadav
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=mafs0mspcb57t.fsf@kernel.org \
--to=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=mwalle@kernel.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=tudor.ambarus@linaro.org \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.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 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).