Re: [PATCH v2 03/16] bitmap: Use FIELD_PREP() in expansion of FIELD_PREP_WM16()

[Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 02:22:32PM +0100, Nicolas Frattaroli wrote:
> On Friday, 12 December 2025 20:37:08 Central European Standard Time david.laight.linux@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
> > 
> > Instead of directly expanding __BF_FIELD_CHECK() (which really ought
> > not be used outside bitfield) and open-coding the generation of the
> > masked value, just call FIELD_PREP() and add an extra check for
> > the mask being at most 16 bits.
> > The extra check is added after calling FIELD_PREP() to get a sane
> > error message if 'mask' isn't constant.
> > 
> > Remove the leading _ from the formal parameter names.
> > Prefix the local variables with _wm16_ to hopefully make them
> > unique.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > 
> > Changes for v2:
> > - Update kerneldoc to match changed formal parameter names.
> > - Change local variables to not collide with those in FIELD_PREP().
> > 
> > Most of the examples are constants and get optimised away.
> > 
> >  include/linux/hw_bitfield.h | 21 ++++++++++-----------
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/hw_bitfield.h b/include/linux/hw_bitfield.h
> > index df202e167ce4..0bd1040a5f93 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/hw_bitfield.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/hw_bitfield.h
> > @@ -12,8 +12,8 @@
> >  
> >  /**
> >   * FIELD_PREP_WM16() - prepare a bitfield element with a mask in the upper half
> > - * @_mask: shifted mask defining the field's length and position
> > - * @_val:  value to put in the field
> > + * @mask: shifted mask defining the field's length and position
> > + * @val:  value to put in the field
> >   *
> >   * FIELD_PREP_WM16() masks and shifts up the value, as well as bitwise ORs the
> >   * result with the mask shifted up by 16.
> > @@ -23,15 +23,14 @@
> >   * register, a bit in the lower half is only updated if the corresponding bit
> >   * in the upper half is high.
> >   */
> > -#define FIELD_PREP_WM16(_mask, _val)					     \
> > -	({								     \
> > -		typeof(_val) __val = _val;				     \
> > -		typeof(_mask) __mask = _mask;				     \
> > -		__BF_FIELD_CHECK(__mask, ((u16)0U), __val,		     \
> > -				 "HWORD_UPDATE: ");			     \
> > -		(((typeof(__mask))(__val) << __bf_shf(__mask)) & (__mask)) | \
> > -		((__mask) << 16);					     \
> > -	})
> > +#define FIELD_PREP_WM16(mask, val)				\
> > +({								\
> > +	__auto_type _wm16_mask = mask;				\
> > +	u32 _wm16_val = FIELD_PREP(_wm16_mask, val);		\
> > +	BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG(_wm16_mask > 0xffffu,			\
> > +			 "FIELD_PREP_WM16: mask too large");	\
> > +	_wm16_val | (_wm16_mask << 16);				\
> > +})
> >  
> >  /**
> >   * FIELD_PREP_WM16_CONST() - prepare a constant bitfield element with a mask in
> > 
> 
> Tested-by: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@collabora.com>
> 
> Compiled it with my usual config and booted it on a board that uses
> drivers that make use of these macros, and checked that things are
> working.

Nicolas, thanks for testing! Would you also want to add an explicit
ack or review tag?

David, I'm OK with this change. Please add bloat-o-meter and code
generation examples, and minimize the diff as I asked in v1, before I
can merge it.

Thanks,
Yury