Displaying 9 results from an estimated 9 matches for "roundup_64".
Did you mean:
roundup64
2019 May 23
2
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
From: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt at goodmis.org>
In discussing a build failure on x86_32 due to the use of roundup() on
a 64 bit number, I realized that there's no generic equivalent
roundup_64(). It is implemented in two separate places in the kernel,
but there really should be just one that all can use.
Although the other implementations are a static inline function, this
implementation is a macro to allow the use of typeof(x) to denote the
type that is being used. If the build is on a...
2019 May 23
4
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On Thu, 23 May 2019 08:10:44 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:00 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt at goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > +# define roundup_64(x, y) ( \
> > +{ \
> > + typeof(y) __y = y; \
> > + typeof(x) __x = (x) + (__y - 1); \
> > + do_div(__x, __y);...
2019 May 23
0
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:00 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt at goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> +# define roundup_64(x, y) ( \
> +{ \
> + typeof(y) __y = y; \
> + typeof(x) __x = (x) + (__y - 1); \
> + do_div(__x, __y); \
> +...
2019 May 23
1
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
...e same time, in the case you are talking about, I really do
> suspect that we have a (non-constant) power of two, and that you
> should have just used "round_up()" which works fine regardless of
> size, and is always efficient.
I think you are correct in this.
act_size = roundup_64(attr->length, MLX5_SW_ICM_BLOCK_SIZE(dm_db->dev));
Where we have:
#define MLX5_SW_ICM_BLOCK_SIZE(dev) (1 << MLX5_LOG_SW_ICM_BLOCK_SIZE(dev))
Which pretty much guarantees that it is a power of two. Thus, the real
fix here is simply to s/roundup/round_up/ as you suggest.
>
> On...
2019 May 23
0
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 8:27 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt at goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> I haven't yet tested this, but what about something like the following:
So that at least handles the constant case that the normal "roundup()"
case also handles.
At the same time, in the case you are talking about, I really do
suspect that we have a (non-constant) power of two, and that
2019 May 24
0
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On Fri, 24 May 2019 16:11:14 +0100
Roger Willcocks <roger at filmlight.ltd.uk> wrote:
> On 23/05/2019 16:27, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > I haven't yet tested this, but what about something like the following:
> >
> > ...perhaps forget about the constant check, and just force
> > the power of two check:
> >
> > \
> > if (!(__y
2019 May 24
0
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On Fri, 24 May 2019 19:30:45 +0300
Nikolay Borisov <nborisov at suse.com> wrote:
> > Yes I do. I corrected it in my next email.
> >
> > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190523133648.591f9e78 at gandalf.local.home
>
> Or perhaps just using is_power_of_2 from include/linux/log2.h ?
Even better. Thanks,
-- Steve
2019 May 24
1
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On 23/05/2019 16:27, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> I haven't yet tested this, but what about something like the following:
>
> ...perhaps forget about the constant check, and just force
> the power of two check:
>
> \
> if (!(__y & (__y >> 1))) { \
> __x = round_up(x, y); \
> } else { \
You probably want
if (!(__y & (__y
2019 May 24
1
[RFC][PATCH] kernel.h: Add generic roundup_64() macro
On 24.05.19 г. 18:26 ч., Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2019 16:11:14 +0100
> Roger Willcocks <roger at filmlight.ltd.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 23/05/2019 16:27, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>
>>> I haven't yet tested this, but what about something like the following:
>>>
>>> ...perhaps forget about the constant check, and just force