On 03/12/2020 19.46, Yury Norov wrote: > I would prefer to avoid changing the find*bit() semantics. As for now, > if any of find_*_bit() > finds nothing, it returns the size of the bitmap it was passed. Yeah, we should actually try to fix that, it causes bad code generation. It's hard, because callers of course do that "if ret == size" check. But it's really silly that something like find_first_bit needs to do that "min(i*BPL + __ffs(word), size)" - the caller does a comparison anyway, that comparison might as well be "ret >= size" rather than "ret == size", and then we could get rid of that branch (which min() necessarily becomes) at the end of find_next_bit. I haven't dug very deep into this, but I could also imagine the arch-specific parts of this might become a little easier to do if the semantics were just "if no such bit, return an indeterminate value >= the size". > Changing this for > a single function would break the consistency, and may cause problems > for those who > rely on existing behaviour. True. But I think it should be possible - I suppose most users are via the iterator macros, which could all be updated at once. Changing ret == size to ret >= size will still work even if the implementations have not been switched over, so it should be doable. > > Passing non-positive size to find_*_bit() should produce undefined > behaviour, because we cannot dereference a pointer to the bitmap in > this case; this is most probably a sign of a problem on a caller side > anyways. No, the out-of-line bitmap functions should all handle the case of a zero-size bitmap sensibly. Is bitmap full? Yes (all the 0 bits are set). Is bitmap empty? Yes, (none of the 0 bits are set). Find the first bit set (returns 0, there's no such bit) Etc. The static inlines for small_const_nbits do assume that the pointer can be dereferenced, which is why small_const_nbits was updated to mean 1<=bits<=BITS_PER_LONG rather than just bits<=BITS_PER_LONG. Rasmus
