Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Jul 2014 16:20:08 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/18] lib: bitmap: Various improvements |
| |
On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 00:42:46 +0200 Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
> Many functions in lib/bitmap.c start with an expression such as lim = > bits/BITS_PER_LONG. Since bits has type (signed) int, and since gcc > cannot know that it is in fact non-negative, it generates worse code > than it could. These patches, mostly consisting of changing various > parameters to unsigned, gives a slight overall code reduction:
Yes, we have a bad habit of using signed types for things where negative values are absurd.
The patches look OK to me.
> A few issues I thought about, but didn't know what to do with: > > * Many of the functions misbehave if nbits is compile-time 0; the > out-of-line functions generally handle 0 correctly. bitmap_fill() is > particularly bad, whether the 0 is known at compile time or not. It > would probably be nice to add detection of at least compile-time 0 > and handle that appropriately.
The best option here would be a compile-time check. Presumably BUILD_BUG_ON(). That will catch the errant use and will add no runtime overhead.
> * I didn't change __bitmap_shift_{left,right} to use unsigned because > I want to fully understand why the algorithm works before making > that change. However, AFAICT, they behave correctly for all > (positive) shift amounts. This is not the case for the > small_const_nbits versions. If for example nbits = n = > BITS_PER_LONG, the shift operators turn into no-ops (at least on > x86), so one get *dst = *src, whereas one would expect to get > *dst=0. That difference in behaviour is somewhat annoying.
yup.
| |