Re: [PATCH v4 33/40] sh: mach-x3proto: optimize ilsel_enable()
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <4bd2e538d70d8acbdc8da7b0fdb05b93e0614e43.camel@physik.fu-berlin.de> |
Hi Yury, thanks for your patch! On Thu, 2024-06-20 at 10:56 -0700, Yury Norov wrote: > Simplify ilsel_enable() by using find_and_set_bit(). > > Geert also pointed the bug in the old implementation: > > I don't think the old code worked as intended: the first time > no free bit is found, bit would have been ILSEL_LEVELS, and > test_and_set_bit() would have returned false, thus terminating > the loop, and continuing with an out-of-range bit value? Hence > to work correctly, bit ILSEL_LEVELS of ilsel_level_map should > have been initialized to one? Or am I missing something? > > The new code does not have that issue. > > CC: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]> > --- > arch/sh/boards/mach-x3proto/ilsel.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/sh/boards/mach-x3proto/ilsel.c b/arch/sh/boards/mach-x3proto/ilsel.c > index f0d5eb41521a..35b585e154f0 100644 > --- a/arch/sh/boards/mach-x3proto/ilsel.c > +++ b/arch/sh/boards/mach-x3proto/ilsel.c > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ > */ > #define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt > > +#include <linux/find_atomic.h> > #include <linux/init.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > @@ -99,8 +100,8 @@ int ilsel_enable(ilsel_source_t set) > } > > do { > - bit = find_first_zero_bit(&ilsel_level_map, ILSEL_LEVELS); > - } while (test_and_set_bit(bit, &ilsel_level_map)); > + bit = find_and_set_bit(&ilsel_level_map, ILSEL_LEVELS); > + } while (bit >= ILSEL_LEVELS); > > __ilsel_enable(set, bit); I will need to take a closer look at the whole code in ilsel_enable() to understand what's happening here. If Geert's explanation is correct, it sounds more like you're fixing a bug and saying you're optimizing the function in the patch subject would sound more like an euphemism. Also, I think we should add a Fixes tag if possible in case your patch fixes an actual bug. I will have a closer look over the weekend. Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer `. `' Physicist `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913