On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 3:12 PM HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) <k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:30 PM HAGIO KAZUHITO(萩尾 一仁) <k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx <mailto:k-hagio-ab@xxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
>
>
> Hi Lianbo,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> > diff --git a/defs.h b/defs.h
> > index 81ac049..1e8360d 100644
> > --- a/defs.h
> > +++ b/defs.h
> > @@ -4531,6 +4531,26 @@ struct machine_specific {
> > #define NUM_IN_BITMAP(bitmap, x) (bitmap[(x)/BITS_PER_LONG] & NUM_TO_BIT(x))
> > #define SET_BIT(bitmap, x) (bitmap[(x)/BITS_PER_LONG] |= NUM_TO_BIT(x))
> >
> > +static inline unsigned int __const_hweight8(unsigned long w)
> > +{
> > + return
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 0))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 1))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 2))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 3))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 4))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 5))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 6))) +
> > + (!!((w) & (1ULL << 7)));
> > +}
> > +
> > +#define __const_hweight16(w) (__const_hweight8(w) + __const_hweight8((w) >> 8))
> > +#define __const_hweight32(w) (__const_hweight16(w) + __const_hweight16((w) >> 16))
> > +#define __const_hweight64(w) (__const_hweight32(w) + __const_hweight32((w) >> 32))
> > +
> > +#define hweight32(w) __const_hweight32(w)
> > +#define hweight64(w) __const_hweight64(w)
> > +
> >
> >
> >
> > No need to move the above code from sbitmap.c to defs.h, a simple way is to implement a new function
> in
> > sbitmap.c and add its definition in defs.h, that will
> > be easy to call it in diskdump.c. For example:
> >
> > diff --git a/defs.h b/defs.h
> > index 81ac0498dac7..0c5115e71f1c 100644
> > --- a/defs.h
> > +++ b/defs.h
> > @@ -5894,6 +5894,7 @@ typedef bool (*sbitmap_for_each_fn)(unsigned int idx, void *p);
> > void sbitmap_for_each_set(const struct sbitmap_context *sc,
> > sbitmap_for_each_fn fn, void *data);
> > void sbitmap_context_load(ulong addr, struct sbitmap_context *sc);
> > +unsigned long get_hweight64(unsigned long w);
> >
> > /* sbitmap_queue helpers */
> > typedef bool (*sbitmapq_for_each_fn)(unsigned int idx, ulong addr, void *p);
> > diff --git a/sbitmap.c b/sbitmap.c
> > index 286259f71d64..628cc00c0b6b 100644
> > --- a/sbitmap.c
> > +++ b/sbitmap.c
> > @@ -71,6 +71,11 @@ static inline unsigned int __const_hweight8(unsigned long w)
> >
> > #define BIT(nr) (1UL << (nr))
> >
> > +unsigned long get_hweight64(unsigned long w)
> > +{
> > + return hweight64(w);
> > +}
> > +
> > static inline unsigned long min(unsigned long a, unsigned long b)
> > {
> > return (a < b) ? a : b;
> >
> >
> > //diskdump.c
> > ...
> > dd->valid_pages[i] += get_hweight64(tmp);
> >
> > ...
> >
> > How about the above suggestions? Shijie and Kazu.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, but personally I don't think it has more
> benefits than moving them. What is the good point?
>
>
>
> It has fewer code changes. The bitmap operation can be maintained together
> in the sbitmap.c and won't be scattered elsewhere.
>
> In the future, some new functions may be still extended for the bitmap operations in the sbitmap.c, that
> will avoid adding more bitmap operations to defs.h.
>
> That's my concern. If that is not a problem, the v2 will be fine to me. :-)
Thanks for the explanation, I see. I think that it's not a problem
for now.
Now at least the existing bitmap operations become common ones and they
do not use values in the sbitmap.c, it's not suitable to maintain them
there with a function to access. If new functions are extended, let's
optimize them at that time.
Thanks for your comment, Kazu.
I have no other issue. Applied
Thanks.
Lianbo
-- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility Contribution Guidelines: https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/wiki
