[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z_fesYbCnSjAo-K4@yury>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 11:07:29 -0400
From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
To: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@...il.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, jk@...abs.org,
joel@....id.au, eajames@...ux.ibm.com, andrzej.hajda@...el.com,
neil.armstrong@...aro.org, rfoss@...nel.org,
maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org,
tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch,
dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
awalls@...metrocast.net, hverkuil@...all.nl,
miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, richard@....at, vigneshr@...com,
louis.peens@...igine.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
parthiban.veerasooran@...rochip.com, arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com,
johannes@...solutions.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
jirislaby@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jdelvare@...e.com,
linux@...ck-us.net, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, pgaj@...ence.com,
hpa@...or.com, alistair@...ple.id.au, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com, jonas@...boo.se,
jernej.skrabec@...il.com, kuba@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsi@...ts.ozlabs.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
oss-drivers@...igine.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, brcm80211@...ts.linux.dev,
brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, jserv@...s.ncku.edu.tw, Frank.Li@....com,
linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org,
david.laight.linux@...il.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/13] media: media/test_drivers: Replace open-coded
parity calculation with parity_odd()
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 02:56:41AM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 02:41:03PM -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 02:23:09AM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 01:03:42PM -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 11:43:45PM +0800, Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> > > > So, if val == 0 than parity_odd(val) is also 0, and this can be
> > > > simplified just to:
> > > > return parity(val) ? 0 : 0x80;
> > > > Or I miss something?
> > > >
> > > If val == 0x01, the return value of calc_parity() will remain 0x01.
> > > If changed to return parity_odd(val) ? 0 : 0x80;, the return value will
> > > be changed to 0x00.
> >
> > Sorry, I meant
> > return val ? 0 : 0x80;
> >
> > This 'val | (parity_odd(val)' is only false when val == 0, right?
> > When val != 0, compiler will return true immediately, not even calling
> > parity().
> >
> I'm still confused.
>
> Maybe you're interpreting the code as:
>
> (val | parity(val)) ? 0 : 0x80
>
> But what we're trying to do is:
>
> val | (parity(val) ? 0 : 0x80)
>
> So, for example, if val == 0x06, the return value will be 0x86.
> Only returning 0 or 0x80 seems wrong to me.
> Or did I misunderstand something?
I misread the whole construction. Sorry, you're right. Scratch this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists