Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAM7-yPQcmU3MM66oAHQ6kcEukPFgj074_h-S-S+O53Lrx2yeBg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201202094717.GX4077@smile.fi.intel.com> <c79b08e9-d36a-849e-d023-6fa155043aa9@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
In-Reply-To: <c79b08e9-d36a-849e-d023-6fa155043aa9@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
From:   Yun Levi <ppbuk5246@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Dec 2020 20:50:24 +0900
Message-ID: <CAM7-yPTsy+wJO8oQ7srjiXk+VjFFSUdJfdnVx9Ma_H8jJJnZKA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/find_bit: Add find_prev_*_bit functions.
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        dushistov@mail.ru, arnd@arndb.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        gustavo@embeddedor.com, vilhelm.gray@gmail.com,
        richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com, joseph.qi@linux.alibaba.com,
        skalluru@marvell.com, yury.norov@gmail.com, jpoimboe@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Thanks for kind advice. But I'm so afraid to have questions below:

 > - it proposes functionality w/o user (dead code)
     Actually, I add these series functions to rewrite some of the
resource clean-up routine.
     A typical case is ethtool_set_per_queue_coalesce 's rollback label.
     Could this usage be an actual use case?

 >- it lacks extension of the bitmap test module to cover the new
 > functions (that also wants to be a separate patch).
     I see, then Could I add some of testcase on lib/test_bitops.c for testing?


On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 7:04 PM Rasmus Villemoes
<linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
>
> On 02/12/2020 10.47, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 10:10:09AM +0900, Yun Levi wrote:
> >> Inspired find_next_*bit function series, add find_prev_*_bit series.
> >> I'm not sure whether it'll be used right now But, I add these functions
> >> for future usage.
> >
> > This patch has few issues:
> > - it has more things than described (should be several patches instead)
> > - new functionality can be split logically to couple or more pieces as well
> > - it proposes functionality w/o user (dead code)
>
> Yeah, the last point means it can't be applied - please submit it again
> if and when you have an actual use case. And I'll add
>
> - it lacks extension of the bitmap test module to cover the new
> functions (that also wants to be a separate patch).
>
> Rasmus