Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: simplify kvm_vector_to_index()

["Jürgen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1436 bytes --]

On 20.08.25 16:12, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 04:01:22PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> On 20.08.25 15:42, Yury Norov wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 04:12:11PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 21:58:45 -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
>>>>> Use find_nth_bit() and make the function almost a one-liner.
>>>>
>>>> Applied to kvm-x86 misc, thanks!
>>>>
>>>> P.S. I'm amazed you could decipher the intent of the code.  Even with your
>>>>        patch, it took me 10+ minutes to understand the "logic".
>>>
>>> Thanks Sean. :)
>>>
>>>> [1/1] kvm: x86: simplify kvm_vector_to_index()
>>>>         https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/cc63f918a215
>>
>> Is this really correct?
>>
>> The original code has:
>>
>> 	for (i = 0; i <= mod; i++)
>>
>> (note the "<=").
>>
>> So it will find the (mod + 1)th bit set, so shouldn't it use
>>
>> 	idx = find_nth_bit(bitmap, bitmap_size, (vector % dest_vcpus) + 1);
>>
>> instead?
>>
>> My remark assumes that find_nth_bit(bitmap, bitmap_size, 1) will return the
>> same value as find_first_bit(bitmap, bitmap_size).
> 
> find_nth_bit indexes those bits starting from 0, so
Ah, okay. That was the part I wasn't sure about, hence the addition of
my assumption regarding the semantics of find_nth_bit() (looking into the
__find_nth_bit() code didn't make that obvious at once).

Thanks for the clarification.


Juergen

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3743 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]