From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F9CC433F5 for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 08:22:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C33A2075E for ; Fri, 7 Sep 2018 08:22:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3C33A2075E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727529AbeIGNBs (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:01:48 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:35670 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725940AbeIGNBs (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:01:48 -0400 Received: from p4fea45ac.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([79.234.69.172] helo=nanos) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1fyC1d-0001Ww-Ax; Fri, 07 Sep 2018 10:21:57 +0200 Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 10:21:56 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: "Yang, Bin" cc: "mingo@kernel.org" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "Gross, Mark" , "x86@kernel.org" , "Hansen, Dave" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] x86/mm: optimize static_protection() by using overlap() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1534814186-37067-1-git-send-email-bin.yang@intel.com> <1534814186-37067-5-git-send-email-bin.yang@intel.com> <82fc8d80749f920c4a5107469924205d92037785.camel@intel.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 7 Sep 2018, Yang, Bin wrote: > On Fri, 2018-09-07 at 09:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Sep 2018, Yang, Bin wrote: > > > On Tue, 2018-09-04 at 14:22 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > I just write a test.c to compare the result between overlap() and > > > original within(). > > > > You are right. Your version of doing the overlap exclusive works. I misread > > the conditions. I still prefer doing inclusive checks because they are way > > more obvious. > > I am sorry for my poor english. What is "inclusive checks"? Exlusive: val >= start && val < end Inclusive: val >= start && val <= end So the difference is that you feed exclusive with: end = start + size and inclusive with end = start + size - 1 Thanks, tglx