From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
To: "George Spelvin" <linux@horizon.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk,
davem@davemloft.net, dborkman@redhat.com,
hannes@stressinduktion.org, klimov.linux@gmail.com,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
msalter@redhat.com, takahiro.akashi@linaro.org, tgraf@suug.ch,
valentinrothberg@gmail.com, yury.norov@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] lib: find_*_bit reimplementation
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 23:14:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877fvow0y8.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150209164542.10207.qmail@ns.horizon.com> (George Spelvin's message of "9 Feb 2015 11:45:42 -0500")
[for some reason google decided to put this in my spam folder, hrmpf]
On Mon, Feb 09 2015, "George Spelvin" <linux@horizon.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I screwed up the bit-twiddling while messing with various options.
> I was trying to get size == 32 to work; that should have been:
>
>> tmp &= (2UL << ((size-1) % BITS_PER_LONG)) - 1; /* Mask last word */
>
> And you're right that LAST_WORD_MASK is a good wrapper.
>
Well, it's not my invention, I just misremembered the
name. linux/bitmap.h already exposes BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK.
> Vasrious working solutions include:
> #define LAST_WORD_MASK(bits) ((2UL << (bits-1) % BITS_PER_LONG) - 1)
> #define LAST_WORD_MASK(bits) ~(~0UL << bits % BITS_PER_LONG)
> #define LAST_WORD_MASK(bits) (~0UL >> -bits % BITS_PER_LONG)
Incidentally, I had a patch lying around for replacing BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK by
something like the last of these (it is currently using a ?:). But to allow bits to
have signed type it is safer to spell it
#define BITMAP_LAST_WORD_MASK(bits) (~0UL >> ((-(bits)) & (BITS_PER_LONG-1)))
[also adding lots of parentheses so I don't have to worry about precedence].
> I'm not sure which generates the nicest code. It's 4 instructions
> each way, with the last being 1 byte smaller:
I think one would have to look at effects on real code; when just compiling a
function doing nothing but this gcc has to use specific registers for in
and out.
>> Also, I think it is best to handle size==0 appropriately, meaning that
>> one cannot dereference addr in any way (and certainly not addr[-1]).
>
> Ah, okay; l I figured that was a safe case to omit. But your solution is nicer
> than mine overall.
>
> It may be that omitting the mask *is* safe, but it's a lot of wading through
> callers to prove it.
I think generic library code like this should provide both safety
checks, and only if some true performance bottleneck is found can one
start looking at implementing __shortcuts which have further constraints
on the caller.
Rasmus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-11 22:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-08 14:10 [PATCH v3 0/3] lib: find_*_bit reimplementation Yury Norov
2015-02-08 14:10 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " Yury Norov
2015-02-08 18:48 ` George Spelvin
2015-02-09 8:32 ` George Spelvin
2015-02-09 11:53 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-09 16:45 ` George Spelvin
2015-02-11 22:14 ` Rasmus Villemoes [this message]
2015-02-11 23:05 ` Yury
2015-02-12 8:15 ` George Spelvin
2015-02-12 9:58 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-12 23:46 ` George Spelvin
2015-02-13 10:13 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-08 14:10 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] lib: move find_last_bit to lib/find_next_bit.c Yury Norov
2015-02-08 14:10 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] lib: rename lib/find_next_bit.c to lib/find_bit.c Yury Norov
2015-02-17 2:35 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] lib: find_*_bit reimplementation Yury Norov
2015-02-17 2:35 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] " Yury Norov
2015-02-18 17:57 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-17 2:35 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] lib: move find_last_bit to lib/find_next_bit.c Yury Norov
2015-02-17 2:35 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] lib: rename lib/find_next_bit.c to lib/find_bit.c Yury Norov
2015-02-22 17:24 ` [PATCH v5 0/3] lib: find_*_bit reimplementation Yury Norov
2015-02-22 17:24 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] " Yury Norov
2015-02-23 21:50 ` Rasmus Villemoes
2015-02-24 0:29 ` George Spelvin
2015-02-22 17:24 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] lib: move find_last_bit to lib/find_next_bit.c Yury Norov
2015-02-22 17:24 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] lib: rename lib/find_next_bit.c to lib/find_bit.c Yury Norov
2015-02-24 0:40 ` [PATCH v5 0/3] lib: find_*_bit reimplementation Andrew Morton
2015-03-08 18:17 ` Yury Norov
[not found] <CAAH8bW-mk0kk-GKDNny6hsjrbcjwdcAacsF_DEaXmNG==hXhRw@mail.gmail.com>
2015-02-13 21:09 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " George Spelvin
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=877fvow0y8.fsf@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--to=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=klimov.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@horizon.com \
--cc=msalter@redhat.com \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
--cc=valentinrothberg@gmail.com \
--cc=yury.norov@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