From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl0-f72.google.com (mail-pl0-f72.google.com [209.85.160.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 128186B0253 for ; Fri, 1 Dec 2017 03:00:39 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pl0-f72.google.com with SMTP id a12so4097000pll.21 for ; Fri, 01 Dec 2017 00:00:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com. [134.134.136.24]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n1si4448822pge.665.2017.12.01.00.00.37 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Dec 2017 00:00:37 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <5A210C96.8050208@intel.com> Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2017 16:02:30 +0800 From: Wei Wang MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 05/10] xbitmap: add more operations References: <1511963726-34070-1-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com> <1511963726-34070-6-git-send-email-wei.w.wang@intel.com> <201711301934.CDC21800.FSLtJFFOOVQHMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <201711301934.CDC21800.FSLtJFFOOVQHMO@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Tetsuo Handa Cc: virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mst@redhat.com, mhocko@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mawilcox@microsoft.com, david@redhat.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net, aarcange@redhat.com, amit.shah@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, willy@infradead.org, liliang.opensource@gmail.com, yang.zhang.wz@gmail.com, quan.xu@aliyun.com, nilal@redhat.com, riel@redhat.com On 11/30/2017 06:34 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Wei Wang wrote: >> + * @start: the start of the bit range, inclusive >> + * @end: the end of the bit range, inclusive >> + * >> + * This function is used to clear a bit in the xbitmap. If all the bits of the >> + * bitmap are 0, the bitmap will be freed. >> + */ >> +void xb_clear_bit_range(struct xb *xb, unsigned long start, unsigned long end) >> +{ >> + struct radix_tree_root *root = &xb->xbrt; >> + struct radix_tree_node *node; >> + void **slot; >> + struct ida_bitmap *bitmap; >> + unsigned int nbits; >> + >> + for (; start < end; start = (start | (IDA_BITMAP_BITS - 1)) + 1) { >> + unsigned long index = start / IDA_BITMAP_BITS; >> + unsigned long bit = start % IDA_BITMAP_BITS; >> + >> + bitmap = __radix_tree_lookup(root, index, &node, &slot); >> + if (radix_tree_exception(bitmap)) { >> + unsigned long ebit = bit + 2; >> + unsigned long tmp = (unsigned long)bitmap; >> + >> + nbits = min(end - start + 1, BITS_PER_LONG - ebit); > "nbits = min(end - start + 1," seems to expect that start == end is legal > for clearing only 1 bit. But this function is no-op if start == end. > Please clarify what "inclusive" intended. If xb_clear_bit_range(xb,10,10), then it is effectively the same as xb_clear_bit(10). Why would it be illegal? "@start inclusive" means that the @start will also be included to be cleared. > >> +static inline __always_inline void bitmap_clear(unsigned long *map, >> + unsigned int start, >> + unsigned int nbits) >> +{ >> + if (__builtin_constant_p(nbits) && nbits == 1) >> + __clear_bit(start, map); >> + else if (__builtin_constant_p(start & 7) && IS_ALIGNED(start, 8) && >> + __builtin_constant_p(nbits & 7) && IS_ALIGNED(nbits, 8)) > It looks strange to apply __builtin_constant_p test to variables after "& 7". > I think this is normal - if the variables are known at compile time, the calculation will be done at compile time (termed constant folding). Best, Wei -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org