On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> hint: sizeof() very rarely evaluates to zero... So this is the same as
> "is32 = 1". So the patch as-is is broken (and may explain the 1-byte
> delta in vmlinux). But even if this condition is fixed, the patch
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Rasmus Villemoes
wrote:
>
> hint: sizeof() very rarely evaluates to zero... So this is the same as
> "is32 = 1". So the patch as-is is broken (and may explain the 1-byte
> delta in vmlinux). But even if this condition is fixed, the patch
> doesn't change anything,
On 14 November 2017 at 07:57, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> Currently, during __bitmap_weight() calculation hweight_long() is used.
> Inside a hweight_long() a check has been made to figure out whether a
> hweight32() or hweight64() version to use.
>
> diff --git a/lib/bitmap.c
On 14 November 2017 at 07:57, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> Currently, during __bitmap_weight() calculation hweight_long() is used.
> Inside a hweight_long() a check has been made to figure out whether a
> hweight32() or hweight64() version to use.
>
> diff --git a/lib/bitmap.c b/lib/bitmap.c
> index
Currently, during __bitmap_weight() calculation hweight_long() is used.
Inside a hweight_long() a check has been made to figure out whether a
hweight32() or hweight64() version to use.
However, it's unnecessary to do it in case of __bitmap_weight() calculation
inside the loop. We can detect
Currently, during __bitmap_weight() calculation hweight_long() is used.
Inside a hweight_long() a check has been made to figure out whether a
hweight32() or hweight64() version to use.
However, it's unnecessary to do it in case of __bitmap_weight() calculation
inside the loop. We can detect
6 matches
Mail list logo