From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@oss.nxp.com>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com>,
Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@nxp.com>,
linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] remoteproc: core: Consolidate bool flags into 1-bit bitfields
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 22:21:17 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251010142117.GC17199@nxa18884-linux.ap.freescale.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9c8d708f-bf20-4dda-abf8-7896c820c611@ti.com>
Hi Andrew,
On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 08:01:10AM -0500, Andrew Davis wrote:
>On 10/5/25 9:14 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
>> Per Documentation/process/coding-style.rst rule 17 regarding the use of
>> bool types:
>> If a structure has many true/false values, consider consolidating them into
>> a bitfield with 1-bit members, or using an appropriate fixed-width type
>> such as u8.
>>
>> This commit replaces multiple bool members in struct rproc with 1-bit
>> bitfields and groups them together. This change reduces the overall size of
>> struct rproc from 0x4d8 to 0x4c8 on ARM64.
>>
>
>Most of the series looks good, but this patch I'm not a fan. This isn't
>a huge savings and bitfields come with many of their own challenges.
Thanks for giving a look on the patchset.
I could drop this change in V3. May I get your R-b for other patches?
(V2 was just posted out after fixed stm32_rproc build issue)
>
>> No functional changes.
>
>If the structure's size changed then that is a functional change. There
Got it.
>also is probably a performance change from extracting the value out of the
>bitfield, where before they might have each been an aligned width variable
>that could be tested in a single cycle.
Agree, but performance may not be critical here.
No problem, I could drop this patch. Let me wait to collect more comments.
Thanks,
Peng
>
>Andrew
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-10 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-05 14:14 [PATCH 0/6] remoteproc: core: misc update Peng Fan
2025-10-05 14:14 ` [PATCH 1/6] remoteproc: core: Drop redundant initialization of 'ret' in rproc_shutdown() Peng Fan
2025-10-05 14:14 ` [PATCH 2/6] remoteproc: core: Sort header includes Peng Fan
2025-10-05 14:14 ` [PATCH 3/6] remoteproc: core: Removed unused headers Peng Fan
2025-10-05 14:14 ` [PATCH 4/6] remoteproc: core: Use cleanup.h macros to simplify lock handling Peng Fan
2025-10-05 14:14 ` [PATCH 5/6] remoteproc: core: Remove unused export of rproc_va_to_pa Peng Fan
2025-10-05 14:14 ` [PATCH 6/6] remoteproc: core: Consolidate bool flags into 1-bit bitfields Peng Fan
2025-10-10 8:44 ` kernel test robot
2025-10-10 13:01 ` Andrew Davis
2025-10-10 14:21 ` Peng Fan [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20251010142117.GC17199@nxa18884-linux.ap.freescale.net \
--to=peng.fan@oss.nxp.com \
--cc=afd@ti.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=arnaud.pouliquen@foss.st.com \
--cc=daniel.baluta@nxp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=peng.fan@nxp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®