From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5C35C4829B for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 14:21:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=gm1 header.b=HCqZorbz; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TYRTS47j1z3d8y for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 01:21:16 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=gm1 header.b=HCqZorbz; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com (client-ip=217.70.183.193; helo=relay1-d.mail.gandi.net; envelope-from=herve.codina@bootlin.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (relay1-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.193]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TYRSc1pzNz2xTP for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2024 01:20:30 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A14A240004; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 14:20:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1707747626; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7rZfjdEu2RYZ/9BtHHNLkIKbP50Gk/4PTrBnkkv9ErI=; b=HCqZorbzy0esT9Eqv/sS9A2HZ4FrwPc/w9nx9jaj7DuOm8mxgj0PaRgWzh3jdZ9NbCOENL 63gi1eZ8V05xzYU+5d4HG8vIdGBid9lAJaH/XrJq6obsJSREHR+qvy/iqMsZAZvHZ1pQB6 yBcCy1YzjUqElDP4fDnwpM8RIknbl5fJ7KxsqeXwhl2iUHLx3OIXOS+lF46ITJQHzcaIAN q7/oWSa5EItG6QLW4IUMlLgNQywuaw/+4aPDawbHlvep8ZtTaO14bs+nLGsIQszn0JBk/7 +Hljz66sK0u46tlT3ZmnMEOnVaB6/aBbX7tQ8MJ0KONxqtfUdGAiNbu3O6v9XA== Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:20:22 +0100 From: Herve Codina To: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND 3/6] bitmap: Make bitmap_onto() available to users Message-ID: <20240212152022.75b10268@bootlin.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20240212075646.19114-1-herve.codina@bootlin.com> <20240212075646.19114-4-herve.codina@bootlin.com> <20240212143753.620ddd6e@bootlin.com> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.2.0 (GTK 3.24.38; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-GND-Sasl: herve.codina@bootlin.com X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Andrew Lunn , Vadim Fedorenko , Yury Norov , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Rasmus Villemoes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet , Mark Brown , Thomas Petazzoni , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:01:38 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 02:37:53PM +0100, Herve Codina wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 14:27:16 +0200 > > Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 08:56:31AM +0100, Herve Codina wrote: > > > > Currently the bitmap_onto() is available only for CONFIG_NUMA=y case, > > > > while some users may benefit out of it and being independent to NUMA > > > > code. > > > > > > > > Make it available to users by moving out of ifdeffery and exporting for > > > > modules. > > > > > > Wondering if you are trying to have something like > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230926052007.3917389-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com/ > > > > Yes, it looks like. > > Can you confirm that your bitmap_scatter() do the same operations as the > > existing bitmap_onto() ? > > I have test cases to be 100% sure, but on the first glance, yes it does with > the adjustment to the atomicity of the operations (which I do not understand > why be atomic in the original bitmap_onto() implementation). > > This actually gives a question if we should use your approach or mine. > At least the help of bitmap_onto() is kinda hard to understand. Agree, the bitmap_onto() code is simpler to understand than its help. I introduced bitmap_off() to be the "reverse" bitmap_onto() operations and I preferred to avoid duplicating function that do the same things. On my side, I initially didn't use the bitmap_*() functions and did the the bits manipulation by hand. During the review, it was suggested to use the bitmap_*() family and I followed this suggestion. I did tests to be sure that bitmap_onto() and bitmap_off() did exactly the same things as my previous code did. > > > If so, your bitmap_gather() will match my bitmap_off() (patch 4 in this > > series). > > Yes. > Regards, Hervé