From: David Hildenbrand <dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, rusty@au1.ibm.com, nab@linux-iscsi.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Brian Swetland <swetland@google.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux390@de.ibm.com, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>,
Sudeep Dutt <sudeep.dutt@intel.com>,
Siva Yerramreddy <yshivakrishna@gmail.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
lguest@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/45] virtio: use u32, not bitmap for struct virtio_device's features
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 17:15:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141127171542.3dbb2bc2@thinkpad-w530> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1417091078-24611-2-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
> From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
>
> It seemed like a good idea, but it's actually a pain when we get more
> than 32 feature bits. Just change it to a u32 for now.
>
> Cc: Brian Swetland <swetland@google.com>
> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
> Acked-by: Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>
> Acked-by: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
Wouldn't it be easier to turn
test_bit(i, dev->features)
into a simple makro like
#define test_bit(i, features) (features & (1 << i))
Similar one for clear_bit and set_bit.
if names collide with existing functions, we could simply rename them to:
set_feature_bit() ...
clear_feature_bit() ...
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/mic/card/mic_virtio.c b/drivers/misc/mic/card/mic_virtio.c
> index e647947..0acd564 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/mic/card/mic_virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/mic/card/mic_virtio.c
> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static void mic_finalize_features(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> bits = min_t(unsigned, feature_len,
> sizeof(vdev->features)) * 8;
> for (i = 0; i < bits; i++) {
> - if (test_bit(i, vdev->features))
> + if (vdev->features & BIT(bits))
Hm, shouldn't that also be "if (vdev->features & (1 << i))"?
> iowrite8(ioread8(&out_features[i / 8]) | (1 << (i % 8)),
> &out_features[i / 8]);
> }
> out_free:
> kfree(features);
> kfree(ccw);
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index df598dd..7814b1f 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -49,9 +49,9 @@ static ssize_t features_show(struct device *_d,
>
> /* We actually represent this as a bitstring, as it could be
> * arbitrary length in future. */
> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(dev->features)*BITS_PER_LONG; i++)
> + for (i = 0; i < sizeof(dev->features)*8; i++)
... sizeof(dev->features) * 8; ...
Do we have a define for 8 ?
> len += sprintf(buf+len, "%c",
> - test_bit(i, dev->features) ? '1' : '0');
> + dev->features & (1ULL << i) ? '1' : '0');
> len += sprintf(buf+len, "\n");
> return len;
> }
> @@ -168,18 +168,18 @@ static int virtio_dev_probe(struct device *_d)
> device_features = dev->config->get_features(dev);
>
[...]
> @@ -483,7 +483,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>
> /* Set up host side. */
> vring_init(&vrh.vring, RINGSIZE, __user_addr_min, ALIGN);
> - vringh_init_user(&vrh, vdev.features[0], RINGSIZE, true,
> + vringh_init_user(&vrh, vdev.features, RINGSIZE, true,
> vrh.vring.desc, vrh.vring.avail, vrh.vring.used);
>
> /* No descriptor to get yet... */
> @@ -652,13 +652,13 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> }
>
> /* Test weird (but legal!) indirect. */
> - if (vdev.features[0] & (1 << VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC)) {
> + if (vdev.features & (1 << VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC)) {
> char *data = __user_addr_max - USER_MEM/4;
> struct vring_desc *d = __user_addr_max - USER_MEM/2;
> struct vring vring;
>
> /* Force creation of direct, which we modify. */
> - vdev.features[0] &= ~(1 << VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC);
> + vdev.features &= ~(1 << VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC);
That could then be something like
clear_feature_bit(VIRTIO_RING_F_INDIRECT_DESC, vdev.features);
(I would prefer such makros over repeating bit actions)
> vq = vring_new_virtqueue(0, RINGSIZE, ALIGN, &vdev, true,
> __user_addr_min,
> never_notify_host,
But on the whole this looks good to me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-27 16:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1417091078-24611-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
2014-11-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v5 01/45] virtio: use u32, not bitmap for struct virtio_device's features Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 16:15 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2014-11-27 16:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 16:34 ` David Hildenbrand
2014-11-27 12:30 ` [PATCH v5 03/45] virtio: add support for 64 bit features Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 12:30 ` [PATCH v5 04/45] virtio: assert 32 bit features in transports Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 12:30 ` [PATCH v5 05/45] virtio_ccw: add support for 64 bit features Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 12:31 ` [PATCH v5 16/45] KVM: s390: Set virtio-ccw transport revision Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 16:01 ` David Hildenbrand
2014-11-27 12:31 ` [PATCH v5 17/45] KVM: s390: virtio-ccw revision 1 SET_VQ Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 12:31 ` [PATCH v5 18/45] KVM: s390 allow virtio_ccw status writes to fail Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-11-27 12:31 ` [PATCH v5 19/45] KVM: s390: enable virtio-ccw revision 1 Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20141127171542.3dbb2bc2@thinkpad-w530 \
--to=dahi@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=amit.shah@redhat.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=lguest@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=nab@linux-iscsi.org \
--cc=ohad@wizery.com \
--cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sudeep.dutt@intel.com \
--cc=swetland@google.com \
--cc=thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=yshivakrishna@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox