Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220824012624.2826445-1-yury.norov@gmail.com>
 <20220824012624.2826445-2-yury.norov@gmail.com> <CAHp75VcB08oTrB8R9Zyo4Ja=c_XqybqdCw46fY4_MNqvSSCtLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <YwYlWjlWO3fFrtQp@yury-laptop>
In-Reply-To: <YwYlWjlWO3fFrtQp@yury-laptop>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Aug 2022 20:45:01 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfrA7S033=mKkUj-SnWWyM9pwEiM_Umrrd4arpf1SNw6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] lib/find_bit: introduce FIND_FIRST_BIT() macro
To:     Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Alexey Klimov <aklimov@redhat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:19 PM Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 12:10:02PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 4:51 AM Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> > > +#define FIND_FIRST_BIT(EXPRESSION, size)                                       \
> > > +({                                                                             \
> > > +       unsigned long idx, val, sz = (size);                                    \
> > > +                                                                               \
> > > +       for (idx = 0; idx * BITS_PER_LONG < sz; idx++) {                        \
> >
> > I think we can do slightly better:
> >
> > for (unsigned long idx = 0; idx < sz; idx += BITS_PER_LONG) {
> >   unsigned long val;
>
> This will blow up the EXPRESSION. We can mitigate it on user side:

I'm not sure I understand how EXPRESSION is involved in all this. What
I proposed is to replace the for-loop one-by-one to
one-by-BITS_PER_LONG. But okay, I have re-read the above patch and now
I see what you are doing, basically you use internal variables of the
macro in the EXPRESSION. Hmm...

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko