On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 01:23:35PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sun, 2010-02-14 at 12:24 +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > > So, if I understand you correctly, your suggestion might work, we > > simply need to rename the lib/hweight.c versions to __sw_hweightN > > and have <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h> have __arch_hweightN -> > > __sw_hweightN wrappers in the default case, all arches which have an > > optimized version will provide it in their respective bitops header... > > > I'm not quite sure what the last 'it' refers to, does that refer to: > 1) an __arch_hweightN() implementation, or > 2) __arch_hweightN() -> __sw_hweightN() wrappers ? > > If you meant 1, then yes. Yes, I mean all architectures which have an optimized hweight will use that optimized version in their __arch_hweightN while as a default fallback for the remaining architectures we'll have __arch_hweightN() -> __sw_hweightN() wrappers in <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h>. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. - Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating Systems Research Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
