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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B641AC0015E for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2023 14:29:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231266AbjGQO3V (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2023 10:29:21 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52038 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229571AbjGQO3T (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2023 10:29:19 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 986B61BE for ; Mon, 17 Jul 2023 07:29:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1689604158; x=1721140158; h=date:from:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version: in-reply-to; bh=U8UgNLsEAL8kyjLXPWzFgbj6b2pD9PD2ERnwE/GiYys=; b=OgUu7286sf3ydYQG5cq3zgZ3tYf9siVbSDzmy6yp/8i/+37pmpkaxFYC Hx18dv+7AKe5CkNFm2VJlvOxcryJcPUGzOnMy62Vw65XuyMIwMAFI7fQM jTNfr9CQfSd2hK9a+8gM52FZnqykMp0lubmRCnLN6X4sxmKFrBYdfLR97 MGR8g+TmWTk0zONHeT9jOYCqgZfhWLO24NlK7mGRnUTeYcOzIgdrE7gnl 35W3l2xYxWRv037lScEQKcDPRgqlI4xpMSpVZKI0IeKkTI7NtcBowRjyp 5F1WtCaIgIhkxPBMPGt3xd2AIziLFmPR/+orogR7iyWaq001Wl5wvGzZy A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10774"; a="369496975" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,211,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="369496975" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Jul 2023 07:29:17 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,202,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="866758705" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2023 07:29:15 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1qLPDs-000je9-2A; Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:29:12 +0300 Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 17:29:12 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, pcc@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, yury.norov@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, eugenis@google.com, syednwaris@gmail.com, william.gray@linaro.org, Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] lib/bitmap: add bitmap_{set,get}_value() Message-ID: References: <20230717113709.328671-1-glider@google.com> <20230717113709.328671-2-glider@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 04:14:57PM +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote: +Cc: Nathan (on code generation question below) ... > > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann > > > > You can use --cc to `git send-email` instead of polluting the commit message. > > Right. But as far as I can tell, certain kernel devs prefer to be CCed > on the whole series, whereas others do not want to see anything but > the actual patch they were interested in. > I am not sure about Arnd's preferences, so I just decided to keep the > tag from the original patch by Syed Nayyar Waris (which I also > consider to be an indication of the fact "that potentially interested > parties have been included in the discussion" per > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.17/process/submitting-patches.html#when-to-use-acked-by-cc-and-co-developed-by) My personal statistics from the field that more than 90% of maintainers would like to receive 100% of the series. Of course it depends on the series (if it's treewide, I will agree with you). Here another point to my suggestion is that Arnd is SoC tree maintainer, where ARM is one of the biggest player, so I think he would like to see arm*: prefixed patches anyway. ... > > > + map[index] &= ~(GENMASK(nbits + offset - 1, offset)); > > > > I remember that this construction may bring horrible code on some architectures > > with some version(s) of the compiler (*). > > Wow, even the trunk Clang and GCC seem to generate better code for > your version of this line: https://godbolt.org/z/36Kqxhe6j Wow, indeed! Perhaps time to report to clang and GCC people. I believe the root cause is that in the original version compiler can't prove that l is constant for GENMASK(). > > To fix that I found an easy refactoring: > > > > map[index] &= ~(GENMASK(nbits, 0) << offset)); > > I'll take this one. > > > (*) don't remember the actual versions, though, but anyway... -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko