Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] bitops: Change parity8() return type to bool

Yury Norov <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.brcm80211,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.infradead.lists.linux-mtd,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-input,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-media,org.kernel.vger.linux-serial,org.kernel.vger.linux-wireless,org.kernel.vger.netdev
Message-ID <Z9MGxknjluvbX19w@thinkpad>
On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 05:09:16PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On March 12, 2025 4:56:31 PM PDT, Jacob Keller <[email protected]> wrote:

[...]

> >This is really a question of whether you expect odd or even parity as
> >the "true" value. I think that would depend on context, and we may not
> >reach a good consensus.
> >
> >I do agree that my brain would jump to "true is even, false is odd".
> >However, I also agree returning the value as 0 for even and 1 for odd
> >kind of made sense before, and updating this to be a bool and then
> >requiring to switch all the callers is a bit obnoxious...
> 
> Odd = 1 = true is the only same definition. It is a bitwise XOR, or sum mod 1.

The x86 implementation will be "popcnt(val) & 1", right? So if we
choose to go with odd == false, we'll have to add an extra negation.
So because it's a purely conventional thing, let's just pick a simpler
one?

Compiler's builtin parity() returns 1 for odd.

Thanks,
Yury
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.