On 10/08/15 13:12, yalin wang wrote: > This change to use swab32(bitrev32()) to implement reverse_order() > function, have better performance on some platforms.
Which platforms? Presuming you tested this, roughly how much better performance? If you didn't, how do you know it's faster? > Signed-off-by: yalin wang <yalin.wang2...@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/video/fbdev/riva/fbdev.c | 19 ++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/riva/fbdev.c > b/drivers/video/fbdev/riva/fbdev.c > index f1ad274..4803901 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/riva/fbdev.c > +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/riva/fbdev.c > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ > #include <linux/init.h> > #include <linux/pci.h> > #include <linux/backlight.h> > +#include <linux/swab.h> > #include <linux/bitrev.h> > #ifdef CONFIG_PMAC_BACKLIGHT > #include <asm/machdep.h> > @@ -84,6 +85,7 @@ > #define SetBit(n) (1<<(n)) > #define Set8Bits(value) ((value)&0xff) > > +#define reverse_order(v) swab32(bitrev32(v)) > /* HW cursor parameters */ > #define MAX_CURS 32 > > @@ -451,15 +453,6 @@ static inline unsigned char MISCin(struct riva_par *par) > return (VGA_RD08(par->riva.PVIO, 0x3cc)); > } > > -static inline void reverse_order(u32 *l) I would suggest to do the work in the inline function, instead of a macro. And if you keep the function prototype the same, then the changes to each reverse_order call site are not needed. Tomi
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
