From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751699AbdFHCz6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 7 Jun 2017 22:55:58 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:59734 "EHLO
        bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751439AbdFHCz5 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 7 Jun 2017 22:55:57 -0400
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:55:56 -0700
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] bitmap: Use memcmp optimisation in more situations
Message-ID: <20170608025556.GB20010@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <20170607142924.28552-1-willy@infradead.org>
 <20170607142924.28552-4-willy@infradead.org>
 <CAHp75VdzKn7Kg_vQodk-7Sqz0HjaHG-JxR_ce-rt8+cke7OerA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VdzKn7Kg_vQodk-7Sqz0HjaHG-JxR_ce-rt8+cke7OerA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:48:04AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Commit 7dd968163f ("bitmap: bitmap_equal memcmp optimization") was
> > rather more restrictive than necessary; we can use memcmp() to implement
> > bitmap_equal() as long as the number of bits can be proved to be a
> > multiple of 8.  And architectures other than s390 may be able to make
> > good use of this optimisation.
> 
> > -       if (__builtin_constant_p(nbits) && (nbits % BITS_PER_LONG) == 0)
> > +       if (__builtin_constant_p(nbits & 7) && IS_ALIGNED(nbits, 8))
> >                 return !memcmp(src1, src2, nbits / 8);
> 
> I'm not sure this is a fully correct change.
> What exactly ' & 7' part does?
> For me looks like you may just drop it.

We only need to know if the bottom 3 bits are 0 to apply this optimisation.
For example, if we have a user which does this:

	nbits = 8;
	if (argle)
		nbits += 8;
	if (bitmap_equal(ptr1, ptr2, nbits))
		blah();

then we can use memcmp() because gcc can deduce that the bottom 3 bits
are never set (try it!  it works!).  We don't need nbits as a whole to
be const.