Re: [PATCH v9 11/20] gpiolib: cdev: support GPIO_V2_LINE_SET_VALUES_IOCTL

[Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:32 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 07:18:08PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 5:36 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add support for the GPIO_V2_LINE_SET_VALUES_IOCTL.
> >
> > > +static long linereq_set_values_unlocked(struct linereq *lr,
> > > +                                       struct gpio_v2_line_values *lv)
> > > +{
> > > +       DECLARE_BITMAP(vals, GPIO_V2_LINES_MAX);
> > > +       struct gpio_desc **descs;
> > > +       unsigned int i, didx, num_set;
> > > +       int ret;
> > > +
> > > +       bitmap_zero(vals, GPIO_V2_LINES_MAX);
> > > +       for (num_set = 0, i = 0; i < lr->num_lines; i++) {
> > > +               if (lv->mask & BIT_ULL(i)) {
> >
> > Similar idea
> >
> > DECLARE_BITMAP(mask, 64) = BITMAP_FROM_U64(lv->mask);
> >
> > num_set = bitmap_weight();
> >
>
> I had played with this option, but bitmap_weight() counts all
> the bits set in the mask - which considers bits >= lr->num_lines.

Does it mean we have a bug in the code and no test case covered it?
Because from the API I see the parameter nbits which should prevent
this.

> So you would need to mask lv->mask before converting it to a bitmap.
> (I'm ok with ignoring those bits in case userspace wants to be lazy and
> use an all 1s mask.)

Can you confirm a bug in bitmap API? If it's so it's a serious one.

> But since we're looping over the bitmap anyway we may as well just
> count as we go.
>
> > for_each_set_bit(i, mask, lr->num_lines)
> >
>
> Yeah, that should work.  I vaguely recall trying this and finding it
> generated larger object code, but I'll give it another try and if it
> works out then include it in v10.


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko