Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-171560-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 07:19:49 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>,
	kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
	oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
	Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] lib/test_bitops: Add benchmark test for fns()
Message-ID: <20240507141949.GA2746430@thelio-3990X>
References: <20240503041701.GA3660305@thelio-3990X>
 <ZjSSylciH+qJeEEG@visitorckw-System-Product-Name>
 <ZjSUk4vgsQ63wfcn@visitorckw-System-Product-Name>
 <20240503155401.GA3960118@thelio-3990X>
 <ZjVdbavKgDo8a0CZ@yury-ThinkPad>
 <20240503222338.GA1908482@thelio-3990X>
 <CANiq72mJPPp=H6qb7sG1K1hxR3uiHA9+WEVAZkvymSt_dW3CbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240506175209.GA1425562@thelio-3990X>
 <CANiq72=mSafSJH1hab57LxYfyj_BD7UOtyAerOT8S41MD-MnAw@mail.gmail.com>
 <Zjld/ImGmyBHTLO4@yury-ThinkPad>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <Zjld/ImGmyBHTLO4@yury-ThinkPad>

On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 03:47:24PM -0700, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 08:08:41PM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 7:52 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > No, unused can be used with local variables, used cannot.
> > 
> > Yeah, sorry, I meant `used`, i.e. it is that one the one that
> > constraints the combination rather than `unused`.
> > 
> > >From a quick look at the links in `compiler_attributes.h`, `unused`
> > can also be applied to types, while `used` cannot -- it is another
> > difference, but your sentence above already implies it anyway. :)
> > 
> > Thanks for the correction!
> 
> I have applied the patch in bitmap-for-next this weekend.
> 
> https://github.com/norov/linux/commit/eb21fc0c96b48d1e779a0ab16f9165a3e0cd76ad
> 
> Can you guys please take a look at it wrt the last comments? I think
> it's OK. But if not, I will resend it.

Yeah, I think it looks reasonable.

Cheers,
Nathan