From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: colpatch@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mbligh@aracnet.com, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mask ADT: bitmap and bitop tweaks [1/22]
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 18:55:35 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040330025535.GD791@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040329174637.3aa16260.pj@sgi.com>
At some point in the past, I wrote:
>> akpm, this is needed for mainline.
On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 05:46:37PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> How urgent to you consider this fix (masking unused bits in the
> arithmetic (single unsigned long word) cpumask implementation?
> So far as I know, the only way to get high bits set with correct
> invocations is by using cpus_complement(), which I don't see anyone
> doing.
> So I believe that this patch fixes latent bugs, not current bugs.
False. The semantics are currently "don't care" and the ADT fails to
ignore the upper bits in cpumask_arith.h. It's a bug in the ADT code.
Whether callers experience ill effects is irrelevant.
On Mon, Mar 29, 2004 at 05:46:37PM -0800, Paul Jackson wrote:
> And it would be my preference (not surprisingly) to fix this in a way
> that is consistent with my mask ADT proposal (avoid setting unused bits
> on proper calls; don't filter on Boolean/scalar predicate evaluations):
> +#if NR_CPUS % BITS_PER_LONG
> +#define __CPU_VALID_MASK__ (~((1UL<< (NR_CPUS%BITS_PER_LONG) - 1))
> +#else
> +#define __CPU_VALID_MASK__ (~0UL)
> +#endif
> -#define cpus_complement(map) do { map = ~(map); } while (0)
> +#define cpus_complement(map) \
> + do { map = ~(map) & __CPU_VALID_MASK__; } while (0)
> _instead_ of changing the several other macros to follow the
> bitmap convention (let the unused bits remain dont-care, until
> resolving a Boolean or scalar predicate).
You're missing the changes needed for cpus_shift_left() and
cpus_promote() to satisfy zeroed tail postconditions. IIRC the needed
changes to cpus_shift_left() are also missing from your other patches
in the bitmap code. You are also changing the invariants, which should
be the substance of a patch different from any bugfix.
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-30 2:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-29 12:12 [PATCH] mask ADT: bitmap and bitop tweaks [1/22] Paul Jackson
2004-03-29 23:06 ` Matthew Dobson
2004-03-29 23:52 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-03-29 23:43 ` Paul Jackson
2004-03-30 1:27 ` Matthew Dobson
2004-03-30 2:06 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-03-30 1:46 ` Paul Jackson
2004-03-30 2:55 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2004-03-30 5:09 ` Paul Jackson
2004-03-30 6:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-03-30 8:00 ` Paul Jackson
2004-03-30 9:22 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-03-29 23:50 ` Paul Jackson
2004-03-30 15:53 ` Chris Friesen
2004-03-30 18:30 ` Paul Jackson
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=20040330025535.GD791@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=pj@sgi.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