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;
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To:     'Zhangjin Wu' <falcon@tinylab.org>, "'w@1wt.eu'" <w@1wt.eu>
CC:     "'arnd@arndb.de'" <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "'linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        "'thomas@t-8ch.de'" <thomas@t-8ch.de>,
        "'tanyuan@tinylab.org'" <tanyuan@tinylab.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC] tools/nolibc: replace duplicated -ENOSYS return with single
 -ENOSYS return
Thread-Topic: [RFC] tools/nolibc: replace duplicated -ENOSYS return with
 single -ENOSYS return
Thread-Index: AQHZ2MEQNQnWfqnECUm1iJ9YHQny8K/+quMQgADLxVA=
Date:   Mon, 28 Aug 2023 09:46:14 +0000
Message-ID: <6819b8e273dc44e18f14be148549b828@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <20230827083225.7534-1-falcon@tinylab.org>
 <4bbdea1710464fa2943663a25bf370c9@AcuMS.aculab.com>
In-Reply-To: <4bbdea1710464fa2943663a25bf370c9@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

From: David Laight
> Sent: 27 August 2023 22:52
> 
> ...
> > Of course, we can also use the __stringify() trick to do so, but it is
> > expensive (bigger size, worse performance) to unstringify and get the number
> > again, the expensive atoi() 'works' for the numeric __NR_*, but not work for
> > (__NR_*_base + offset) like __NR_* definitions (used by ARM and MIPS), a simple
> > interpreter is required for such cases and it is more expensive than atoi().
> >
> >     /* not for ARM and MIPS */
> >
> >     static int atoi(const char *s);
> >     #define __get_nr(name)          __nr_atoi(__stringify(__NR_##name))
> >     #define __nr_atoi(str)          (str[0] == '_' ? -1L : ___nr_atoi(str))
> >     #define ___nr_atoi(str)         (str[0] == '(' ? -1L : atoi(str))
> >
> > Welcome more discussion or let's simply throw away this direction ;-)
> 
> While it will look horrid the it ought to be possible to
> get the compiler to evaluate the string.
...
> So something that starts:
> #define dig(c) (c < '0' || c > '9' ? 999999 : c - '0')
> 	str[0] == '_' ? -1 :
> 	str[0] != '(' ? str[1] == ' ' ? dig(str[0]) :
> 		str[2] == '1' ? (dig(str[0]) * 10 + dig(str[1]) :
> Any unexpected character will expand the 99999 and generate
> an over-large result.

See https://godbolt.org/z/rear4c1hj

That will convert "1234" or "(1234 + 5678)" (or shorter numbers)
as a compile-time constant.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)