bitmap_or() and bitmap_andnot() can work properly with dst identical to src1 or src2. There is no need of an intermediate result bitmap that is copied back to dst in a second step.
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@c-s.fr> Reviewed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- v2: New in v2 v3: patch moved up front of the serie to avoid ephemeral slice_bitmap_copy() function in following patch v4: No change arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c | 12 ++++-------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c index 23ec2c5e3b78..98b53d48968f 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/slice.c @@ -388,21 +388,17 @@ static unsigned long slice_find_area(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long len, static inline void slice_or_mask(struct slice_mask *dst, struct slice_mask *src) { - DECLARE_BITMAP(result, SLICE_NUM_HIGH); - dst->low_slices |= src->low_slices; - bitmap_or(result, dst->high_slices, src->high_slices, SLICE_NUM_HIGH); - bitmap_copy(dst->high_slices, result, SLICE_NUM_HIGH); + bitmap_or(dst->high_slices, dst->high_slices, src->high_slices, + SLICE_NUM_HIGH); } static inline void slice_andnot_mask(struct slice_mask *dst, struct slice_mask *src) { - DECLARE_BITMAP(result, SLICE_NUM_HIGH); - dst->low_slices &= ~src->low_slices; - bitmap_andnot(result, dst->high_slices, src->high_slices, SLICE_NUM_HIGH); - bitmap_copy(dst->high_slices, result, SLICE_NUM_HIGH); + bitmap_andnot(dst->high_slices, dst->high_slices, src->high_slices, + SLICE_NUM_HIGH); } #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES -- 2.13.3