[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0906291448510.3864@localhost>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:50:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>
To: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce a boolean "single_bit_set" function.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> Andrew Morton píše v Pá 24. 04. 2009 v 10:46 -0700:
> > On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 06:40:39 -0400 (EDT) "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > so it would be a simple matter to define the bit set boolean in
> > > terms of hweight_long(), yes? so what about, in bitops.h:
> > >
> > > static inline bool
> > > exactly_one_bit_set(unsigned long w)
> > > {
> > > return hweight_long(w) == 1;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static inline bool
> > > more_than_one_bit_set(unsigned long w)
> > > {
> > > return hweight_long(w) > 1;
> > > }
> > >
>
> Andrew, you must be kidding! Are you seriously suggesting to replace
> a simple and instruction with a call to an extern library function
> with 17 instructions (not including the call and ret)?
>
> I'd better check the use of hweight in the kernel to eradicate as
> many calls to it as possible...
since i originally muttered about this, the rationale behind it was
not for performance (obviously), but for semantic clarification, so
that when you saw the expression "n & (n-1)", it was more obvious
which test you were doing semantically:
1) is n a power of 2?
2) does n represent a single set bit?
nothing ever came of that, but that was the thinking behind it.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
Powered by blists - more mailing lists