[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071130143654.3fd39ffe@hyperion.delvare>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:36:54 +0100
From: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To: Bill Gatliff <bgat@...lgatliff.com>
Cc: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Felipe Balbi <felipebalbi@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>,
Andrew Victor <andrew@...people.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
eric miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...sta.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Ben Dooks <ben@...nity.fluff.org>
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc 2/4] pcf875x I2C GPIO expander driver
Hi Bill,
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 07:04:10 -0600, Bill Gatliff wrote:
> Jean Delvare wrote:
> > !!(value & (1 << offset))
> > is more efficiently written
> > (value >> offset) & 1
>
> ... but not more efficiently implemented.
>
> Your version requires code to do the shift on live data at runtime.
> David's version lets the compiler create the mask once, at compile-time.
I don't understand. How could the compiler create the mask at
compile-time when "offset" is only known at runtime?
Anyway, I just checked and gcc (4.1.2 on x86_86) generates the same
code for both expressions, so there's not much to argue about. David,
feel free to ignore my comment if you prefer your implementation :)
--
Jean Delvare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists