linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] gpio: xilinx: Utilize for_each_set

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 1 May 2020 16:32:32 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@...il.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Syed Nayyar Waris <syednwaris@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] gpio: xilinx: Utilize for_each_set_clump macro

On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 2:38 AM William Breathitt Gray
<vilhelm.gray@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 07:38:55PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:45:14PM +0530, Syed Nayyar Waris wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 01:21:14PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 04:39:47AM +0530, Syed Nayyar Waris wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > > +       const unsigned long state_size = BITS_PER_TYPE(*state);
> > > >
> > > > This '*state' is unneeded complication, use BITS_PER_U32.
> > > >
> > > > > +#define TOTAL_BITS BITS_PER_TYPE(chip->gpio_state)
> > > >
> > > > This macro makes code uglier, besides the fact of absence of #undef.
> > > > And also see above.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your review comments. Just want to clarify, you want
> > >  a new macro to be created - 'BITS_PER_U32' ?
> >
> > It's already there (read bits.h).
>
> I'm having trouble finding the BITS_PER_U32 macro; are you thinking of
> BITS_PER_LONG?

Oh, my bad. I messed above with BITS_TO_U32() which is not what we want here.

> I don't think there are any cases where u32 is not 32
> bits wide, so perhaps it'll be better to just hardcode 32 directly in
> the code here to make it easier to read.

Yes, would work!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko