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;
Date:   Wed, 31 Aug 2022 01:51:49 -0700
From:   Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
To:     Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
        Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] x86/asm/bitops: optimize ff{s,z} functions for
 constant expressions
Message-ID: <Yw8hJS9f6SofG4/6@yury-laptop>
References: <20220511160319.1045812-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
 <20220831075742.295-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220831075742.295-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 04:57:40PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> The compilers provide some builtin expression equivalent to the ffs(),
> __ffs() and ffz() functions of the kernel. The kernel uses optimized
> assembly which produces better code than the builtin
> functions. However, such assembly code can not be folded when used
> with constant expressions.
> 
> This series relies on __builtin_constant_p to select the optimal solution:
> 
>   * use kernel assembly for non constant expressions
> 
>   * use compiler's __builtin function for constant expressions.
> 
> 
> ** Statistics **
> 
> Patch 1/2 optimizes 26.7% of ffs() calls and patch 2/2 optimizes 27.9%
> of __ffs() and ffz() calls (details of the calculation in each patch).

Hi Vincent,

Can you please add a test for this? We've recently added a very similar
test_bitmap_const_eval() in lib/test_bitmap.c.

dc34d5036692c ("lib: test_bitmap: add compile-time optimization/evaluations
assertions")

Would be nice to have something like this for ffs() and ffz() in
lib/test_bitops.c.

Please keep me in loop in case of new versions.

Thanks,
Yury