On 1 March 2017 at 00:00, Laura Abbott <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 02/25/2017 03:50 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 25 Feb 2017, at 11:23, Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 25 February 2017 at 11:09, Markus Trippelsdorf
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On 2017.02.25 at 09:11 +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>>> On 25 February 2017 at 08:18, Markus Trippelsdorf <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why not simply get rid of the ____ilog2_NaN thing altogether?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That would remove the issue, sure. But we lose an opportunity to spot
>>>>> incorrect code at compile time.
>>>>
>>>> In the case of kernel/time/timekeeping.c it is clearly a false positive.
>>>> Was ever incorrect code spotted by ____ilog2_NaN in the past?
>>>>
>>>>> My concern is that it by not pushing back on changes to the semantics
>>>>> of __builtin_constant_p() such as this one, we may start seeing other
>>>>> issues where we can no longer use it, and we lose a very useful tool.
>>>>
>>>> We had a long discussion in:
>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
>>>> As you can see there is no real consensus.
>>>> But ilog2 seems to be the only place where this ever popped up.
>>>> (There were several distro-wide mass rebuilds with gcc-7 and no other
>>>> __builtin_constant_p() issue was found yet.)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, given that it is really dead code that is being emitted, and
>>> that log2(0) is really undefined, perhaps we should simply replace
>>> ilog2_NaN() with __builtin_unreachable()?
>>
>> ... or perhaps it is better to just pass the constant == 0 to the runtime implementation?
>>
>> The second ilog2_NaN is really unreachable, given that it deals with unsigned values >0 without a single bit set.
>>
>
> naively throwing in __builtin_unreachable() doesn't seem to
> work:
>
> ./include/linux/log2.h: In function ‘__order_base_2’:
> ./include/linux/log2.h:155:10: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
>
> I'm guessing unreachable is treated as void instead of all
> possible types and therefore gcc assumes that the entire
> function must be void?
>
Something like this perhaps? This will at least prevent incorrect uses
from being silently ignored, but maybe it is a bit overkill.
diff --git a/include/linux/log2.h b/include/linux/log2.h
index ef3d4f67118c..c670b3dfd5ca 100644
--- a/include/linux/log2.h
+++ b/include/linux/log2.h
@@ -18,8 +18,8 @@
/*
* deal with unrepresentable constant logarithms
*/
-extern __attribute__((const, noreturn))
-int ____ilog2_NaN(void);
+static noinline __attribute__((noreturn, warning("ilog2(0) is undefined!")))
+int ____ilog2_NaN(void) { unreachable(); }
/*
* non-constant log of base 2 calculators
On 2 March 2017 at 10:11, Markus Trippelsdorf <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2017.03.01 at 17:39 +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 1 March 2017 at 00:00, Laura Abbott <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > On 02/25/2017 03:50 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On 25 Feb 2017, at 11:23, Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 25 February 2017 at 11:09, Markus Trippelsdorf
>> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>> On 2017.02.25 at 09:11 +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> >>>>>> On 25 February 2017 at 08:18, Markus Trippelsdorf <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Why not simply get rid of the ____ilog2_NaN thing altogether?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> That would remove the issue, sure. But we lose an opportunity to spot
>> >>>>> incorrect code at compile time.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In the case of kernel/time/timekeeping.c it is clearly a false positive.
>> >>>> Was ever incorrect code spotted by ____ilog2_NaN in the past?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> My concern is that it by not pushing back on changes to the semantics
>> >>>>> of __builtin_constant_p() such as this one, we may start seeing other
>> >>>>> issues where we can no longer use it, and we lose a very useful tool.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> We had a long discussion in:
>> >>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
>> >>>> As you can see there is no real consensus.
>> >>>> But ilog2 seems to be the only place where this ever popped up.
>> >>>> (There were several distro-wide mass rebuilds with gcc-7 and no other
>> >>>> __builtin_constant_p() issue was found yet.)
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Well, given that it is really dead code that is being emitted, and
>> >>> that log2(0) is really undefined, perhaps we should simply replace
>> >>> ilog2_NaN() with __builtin_unreachable()?
>> >>
>> >> ... or perhaps it is better to just pass the constant == 0 to the runtime implementation?
>> >>
>> >> The second ilog2_NaN is really unreachable, given that it deals with unsigned values >0 without a single bit set.
>> >>
>> >
>> > naively throwing in __builtin_unreachable() doesn't seem to
>> > work:
>> >
>> > ./include/linux/log2.h: In function ‘__order_base_2’:
>> > ./include/linux/log2.h:155:10: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
>> >
>> > I'm guessing unreachable is treated as void instead of all
>> > possible types and therefore gcc assumes that the entire
>> > function must be void?
>> >
>>
>> Something like this perhaps? This will at least prevent incorrect uses
>> from being silently ignored, but maybe it is a bit overkill.
>> diff --git a/include/linux/log2.h b/include/linux/log2.h
>> index ef3d4f67118c..c670b3dfd5ca 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/log2.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/log2.h
>> @@ -18,8 +18,8 @@
>> /*
>> * deal with unrepresentable constant logarithms
>> */
>> -extern __attribute__((const, noreturn))
>> -int ____ilog2_NaN(void);
>> +static noinline __attribute__((noreturn, warning("ilog2(0) is undefined!")))
>> +int ____ilog2_NaN(void) { unreachable(); }
>>
>> /*
>> * non-constant log of base 2 calculators
>
> Hmm, this will result in the following warning.
>
> In file included from ./include/linux/kernel.h:11:0,
> from ./include/linux/list.h:8,
> from ./include/linux/preempt.h:10,
> from ./include/linux/spinlock.h:50,
> from ./include/linux/seqlock.h:35,
> from ./include/linux/time.h:5,
> from ./include/uapi/linux/timex.h:56,
> from ./include/linux/timex.h:56,
> from ./include/linux/clocksource.h:12,
> from ./include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h:9,
> from kernel/time/timekeeping.c:11:
> kernel/time/timekeeping.c: In function ‘update_wall_time’:
> ./include/linux/log2.h:88:29: warning: call to ‘____ilog2_NaN’ declared with attribute warning: ilog2(0) is undefined!
> __builtin_constant_p(n) ? ( \
> ~~~~
> (n) < 1 ? ____ilog2_NaN() : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 63) ? 63 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 62) ? 62 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 61) ? 61 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 60) ? 60 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 59) ? 59 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 58) ? 58 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 57) ? 57 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 56) ? 56 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 55) ? 55 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 54) ? 54 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 53) ? 53 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 52) ? 52 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 51) ? 51 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 50) ? 50 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 49) ? 49 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 48) ? 48 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 47) ? 47 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 46) ? 46 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 45) ? 45 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 44) ? 44 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 43) ? 43 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 42) ? 42 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 41) ? 41 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 40) ? 40 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 39) ? 39 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 38) ? 38 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 37) ? 37 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 36) ? 36 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 35) ? 35 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 34) ? 34 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 33) ? 33 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 32) ? 32 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 31) ? 31 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 30) ? 30 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 29) ? 29 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 28) ? 28 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 27) ? 27 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 26) ? 26 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 25) ? 25 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 24) ? 24 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 23) ? 23 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 22) ? 22 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 21) ? 21 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 20) ? 20 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 19) ? 19 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 18) ? 18 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 17) ? 17 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 16) ? 16 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 15) ? 15 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 14) ? 14 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 13) ? 13 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 12) ? 12 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 11) ? 11 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 10) ? 10 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 9) ? 9 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 8) ? 8 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 7) ? 7 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 6) ? 6 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 5) ? 5 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 4) ? 4 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 3) ? 3 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 2) ? 2 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 1) ? 1 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> (n) & (1ULL << 0) ? 0 : \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ____ilog2_NaN() \
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ) : \
> ~
> kernel/time/timekeeping.c:2051:10: note: in expansion of macro ‘ilog2’
> shift = ilog2(offset) - ilog2(tk->cycle_interval);
> ^~~~~
>
It is slightly noisier than I expected, but it emphasizes the fact
that it is GCC that is emitting a const '0' into ilog2() and not the
programmer.
On 2017.03.01 at 17:39 +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 1 March 2017 at 00:00, Laura Abbott <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 02/25/2017 03:50 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 25 Feb 2017, at 11:23, Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 25 February 2017 at 11:09, Markus Trippelsdorf
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> On 2017.02.25 at 09:11 +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>>>>> On 25 February 2017 at 08:18, Markus Trippelsdorf <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Why not simply get rid of the ____ilog2_NaN thing altogether?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That would remove the issue, sure. But we lose an opportunity to spot
> >>>>> incorrect code at compile time.
> >>>>
> >>>> In the case of kernel/time/timekeeping.c it is clearly a false positive.
> >>>> Was ever incorrect code spotted by ____ilog2_NaN in the past?
> >>>>
> >>>>> My concern is that it by not pushing back on changes to the semantics
> >>>>> of __builtin_constant_p() such as this one, we may start seeing other
> >>>>> issues where we can no longer use it, and we lose a very useful tool.
> >>>>
> >>>> We had a long discussion in:
> >>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72785
> >>>> As you can see there is no real consensus.
> >>>> But ilog2 seems to be the only place where this ever popped up.
> >>>> (There were several distro-wide mass rebuilds with gcc-7 and no other
> >>>> __builtin_constant_p() issue was found yet.)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Well, given that it is really dead code that is being emitted, and
> >>> that log2(0) is really undefined, perhaps we should simply replace
> >>> ilog2_NaN() with __builtin_unreachable()?
> >>
> >> ... or perhaps it is better to just pass the constant == 0 to the runtime implementation?
> >>
> >> The second ilog2_NaN is really unreachable, given that it deals with unsigned values >0 without a single bit set.
> >>
> >
> > naively throwing in __builtin_unreachable() doesn't seem to
> > work:
> >
> > ./include/linux/log2.h: In function ‘__order_base_2’:
> > ./include/linux/log2.h:155:10: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
> >
> > I'm guessing unreachable is treated as void instead of all
> > possible types and therefore gcc assumes that the entire
> > function must be void?
> >
>
> Something like this perhaps? This will at least prevent incorrect uses
> from being silently ignored, but maybe it is a bit overkill.
> diff --git a/include/linux/log2.h b/include/linux/log2.h
> index ef3d4f67118c..c670b3dfd5ca 100644
> --- a/include/linux/log2.h
> +++ b/include/linux/log2.h
> @@ -18,8 +18,8 @@
> /*
> * deal with unrepresentable constant logarithms
> */
> -extern __attribute__((const, noreturn))
> -int ____ilog2_NaN(void);
> +static noinline __attribute__((noreturn, warning("ilog2(0) is undefined!")))
> +int ____ilog2_NaN(void) { unreachable(); }
>
> /*
> * non-constant log of base 2 calculators
Hmm, this will result in the following warning.
In file included from ./include/linux/kernel.h:11:0,
from ./include/linux/list.h:8,
from ./include/linux/preempt.h:10,
from ./include/linux/spinlock.h:50,
from ./include/linux/seqlock.h:35,
from ./include/linux/time.h:5,
from ./include/uapi/linux/timex.h:56,
from ./include/linux/timex.h:56,
from ./include/linux/clocksource.h:12,
from ./include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h:9,
from kernel/time/timekeeping.c:11:
kernel/time/timekeeping.c: In function ‘update_wall_time’:
./include/linux/log2.h:88:29: warning: call to ‘____ilog2_NaN’ declared with attribute warning: ilog2(0) is undefined!
__builtin_constant_p(n) ? ( \
~~~~
(n) < 1 ? ____ilog2_NaN() : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~
(n) & (1ULL << 63) ? 63 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 62) ? 62 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 61) ? 61 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 60) ? 60 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 59) ? 59 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 58) ? 58 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 57) ? 57 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 56) ? 56 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 55) ? 55 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 54) ? 54 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 53) ? 53 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 52) ? 52 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 51) ? 51 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 50) ? 50 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 49) ? 49 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 48) ? 48 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 47) ? 47 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 46) ? 46 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 45) ? 45 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 44) ? 44 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 43) ? 43 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 42) ? 42 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 41) ? 41 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 40) ? 40 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 39) ? 39 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 38) ? 38 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 37) ? 37 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 36) ? 36 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 35) ? 35 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 34) ? 34 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 33) ? 33 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 32) ? 32 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 31) ? 31 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 30) ? 30 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 29) ? 29 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 28) ? 28 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 27) ? 27 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 26) ? 26 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 25) ? 25 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 24) ? 24 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 23) ? 23 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 22) ? 22 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 21) ? 21 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 20) ? 20 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 19) ? 19 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 18) ? 18 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 17) ? 17 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 16) ? 16 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 15) ? 15 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 14) ? 14 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 13) ? 13 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 12) ? 12 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 11) ? 11 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 10) ? 10 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 9) ? 9 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 8) ? 8 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 7) ? 7 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 6) ? 6 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 5) ? 5 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 4) ? 4 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 3) ? 3 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 2) ? 2 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 1) ? 1 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(n) & (1ULL << 0) ? 0 : \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
____ilog2_NaN() \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
) : \
~
kernel/time/timekeeping.c:2051:10: note: in expansion of macro ‘ilog2’
shift = ilog2(offset) - ilog2(tk->cycle_interval);
^~~~~
--
Markus
I can't take this compiler braindamage any more, so I just decided to
remove the ____ilog2_NaN checks, and return 0 for any constant value <
2.
It's commit 474c90156c8d ("give up on gcc ilog2() constant
optimizations") in my tree. I'll push it out later after my usual
build tests (and I have a few other pulls to do).
Linus