From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754859AbbJHIvj (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2015 04:51:39 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com ([209.85.212.176]:38225 "EHLO mail-wi0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753932AbbJHIvh (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2015 04:51:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 10:51:33 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Prarit Bhargava Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86, bitops, variable_test_bit should return 1 not -1 on a match Message-ID: <20151008085132.GB4729@gmail.com> References: <1440440579-7535-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com> <5615AA55.5000203@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5615AA55.5000203@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Prarit Bhargava wrote: > re-ping on this. Just making sure this wasn't dropped on the floor. So I didn't apply it back when I saw your patch because I didn't see where you addressed/analyzed the second paragraph of hpa's review: "The downside with set is that it only sets a single byte, the upside is that it always outputs 0 or 1, and apparently if the output variable is your bool gcc can use that for optimization." That's a valid concern and should be addressed. Thanks, Ingo