From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932425Ab3FMCop (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:44:45 -0400
Received: from intranet.asianux.com ([58.214.24.6]:18592 "EHLO
	intranet.asianux.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932071Ab3FMCom (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 12 Jun 2013 22:44:42 -0400
X-Spam-Score: -100.8
Message-ID: <51B931E7.5050406@asianux.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 10:43:51 +0800
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
CC: Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
        "dhowells@redhat.com" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>,
        alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-am33-list@redhat.com, Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Suggestion] arch/*/include/asm/bitops.h: about __set_bit() API.
References: <51B30285.6020503@asianux.com> <CA+8MBbK_nfOhZGsd5wU-hyiwh3pHS5c42eiBfxLpCjDgBKUqJg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMuHMdWVx79L=ErRkNMide6xNqQt1RQr0psN8nqoADeV0h768A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdWVx79L=ErRkNMide6xNqQt1RQr0psN8nqoADeV0h768A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 06/11/2013 03:32 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 3:08 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote:
>>> >> using 'unsigned int *', implicitly:
>>> >>   ./ia64/include/asm/bitops.h:63:__set_bit (int nr, volatile void *addr)
>> >
>> > There is some downside on ia64 to your suggestion.  If "addr" is properly
>> > aligned for an "int", but misaligned for a long ... i.e. addr%8 == 4, then I'll
>> > take an unaligned reference trap if I work with long* where the current code
>> > working with int* does not.
>> >
>> > Now perhaps all the callers do guarantee long* alignment?  But I don't know.
>> >
>> > Apart from uniformity, there doesn't see to be any upside to changing this.
> The address pointers have been supposed to be "long *" for a very long time.
> Probably alpha (the second official Linux platform) did it
> differently, and never
> standardized to "long *".

Excuse me, I am not quite familiar with the details, but I guess, it is
about functional feature issues, not (or not only) about bug issues.

For the architectures which can fully support 64-bit OS, excluding ia64
and alpha, all of them can support setting 64 bits (from 0 to 63) under
64-bit machine.

I am not quite sure whether any sub-systems have already set higher bit
(> 31) under 64-bit machine, but in the future, it seems they could (at
least our API supposed so).


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang

Asianux Corporation