From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752681AbdK3OBW (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:01:22 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f169.google.com ([209.85.128.169]:33828 "EHLO mail-wr0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752013AbdK3OBV (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:01:21 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbjbOFOVJxNPqUYBfDqODWW/6/xZCTP760gXtMBJQq0lSxY/mdB2UczeWAyRFfY152GE1b5mw== From: Clement Courbet To: Yury Norov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: [PATCH v5] lib: optimize cpumask_next_and() Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 15:00:53 +0100 Message-Id: <20171130140053.28973-1-courbet@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.15.0.531.g2ccb3012c9-goog In-Reply-To: <20171130062140.vhidjktddah55q3k@yury-thinkpad> References: <20171130062140.vhidjktddah55q3k@yury-thinkpad> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > So I think it really worth to be separated patch. Really, it's > completely nontrivial why adding new function in lib/find_bit.c > requires including asm-generic/bitops/find.h in arm and uncore32 > asm/bitops.h headers (bug?). And why doing that makes you guard > find_first_bit and find_first_zero_bit (another bug?). OK, I'll send a separate patch for this. > Linux-next is your choice. > [...] > Again. test_find_next_and_bit is trimmed, but it is still based on > get_cycles and uses tabs in printf(). Please fix it. OK, I'll send a version of the patch rebased against linux-next.