[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdzKn7Kg_vQodk-7Sqz0HjaHG-JxR_ce-rt8+cke7OerA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 04:48:04 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] bitmap: Use memcmp optimisation in more situations
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> Commit 7dd968163f ("bitmap: bitmap_equal memcmp optimization") was
> rather more restrictive than necessary; we can use memcmp() to implement
> bitmap_equal() as long as the number of bits can be proved to be a
> multiple of 8. And architectures other than s390 may be able to make
> good use of this optimisation.
> - if (__builtin_constant_p(nbits) && (nbits % BITS_PER_LONG) == 0)
> + if (__builtin_constant_p(nbits & 7) && IS_ALIGNED(nbits, 8))
> return !memcmp(src1, src2, nbits / 8);
I'm not sure this is a fully correct change.
What exactly ' & 7' part does?
For me looks like you may just drop it.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists