lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] bitfield: add constant field preparation macros
From
Date
On 12/10/2018 20:45, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
>
> John Garry requested to be able to use FIELD_PREP() and friends
> in constant initializers, but we cannot completely switch all of
> the current assertions to BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO().
>

Thanks for this.

> So instead of this, add __FIELD_PREP() which is suitable in such
> contexts, and also add __{u,le,be}{16,32,64}encode_bits() like
> the existing versions without underscores, but again suitable in
> constant contexts.
>
> Requested-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
> ---
> include/linux/bitfield.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bitfield.h b/include/linux/bitfield.h
> index 3f1ef4450a7c..245dfb47d201 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bitfield.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bitfield.h
> @@ -63,6 +63,14 @@
> (1ULL << __bf_shf(_mask))); \
> })
>
> +#define __BF_CHECK_POW2(n) BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(((n) & ((n) - 1)) != 0)
> +
> +#define __BF_FIELD_CHECK_CONST(_mask, _reg, _val) \
> + (BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((_mask) == 0) + \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(~((_mask) >> __bf_shf(_mask)) & (_val)) + \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((_mask) > (typeof(_reg))~0ull) + \
> + __BF_CHECK_POW2((_mask) + (1ULL << __bf_shf(_mask))))
> +
> /**
> * FIELD_FIT() - check if value fits in the field
> * @_mask: shifted mask defining the field's length and position
> @@ -90,6 +98,21 @@
> ((typeof(_mask))(_val) << __bf_shf(_mask)) & (_mask); \
> })
>
> +/**
> + * __FIELD_PREP() - prepare a constant bitfield element

My impression is that the name prefix - '__' - tells little about the
function. If you agree, how about even CFIELD_PREP() or
FIELD_PREP_CONST() or similar? I preper the latter, but becomes rather long.

> + * @_mask: shifted mask defining the field's length and position
> + * @_val: value to put in the field
> + *
> + * __FIELD_PREP() masks and shifts up the value. The result should
> + * be combined with other fields of the bitfield using local OR.

should this be 'logical OR', or indeed 'bitwise OR'?

> + *
> + * This version is suitable for use in a pure constant context, e.g.
> + * a constant initializer.
> + */
> +#define __FIELD_PREP(_mask, _val) \
> + ((typeof(_mask))__BF_FIELD_CHECK_CONST(_mask, 0ULL, _val) + \
> + (((typeof(_mask))(_val) << __bf_shf(_mask)) & (_mask)))
> +
> /**
> * FIELD_GET() - extract a bitfield element
> * @_mask: shifted mask defining the field's length and position
> @@ -150,4 +173,15 @@ __MAKE_OP(64)
> #undef __MAKE_OP
> #undef ____MAKE_OP
>
> +#define __encode_bits(w, v, field) __FIELD_PREP((u##w)(field), v)
> +#define __u16_encode_bits(v, field) __encode_bits(16, v, field)
> +#define __le16_encode_bits(v, field) cpu_to_le16(__encode_bits(16, v, field))
> +#define __be16_encode_bits(v, field) cpu_to_be16(__encode_bits(16, v, field))
> +#define __u32_encode_bits(v, field) __encode_bits(32, v, field)
> +#define __le32_encode_bits(v, field) cpu_to_le32(__encode_bits(32, v, field))
> +#define __be32_encode_bits(v, field) cpu_to_be32(__encode_bits(32, v, field))
> +#define __u64_encode_bits(v, field) __encode_bits(64, v, field)
> +#define __le64_encode_bits(v, field) cpu_to_le64(__encode_bits(64, v, field))
> +#define __be64_encode_bits(v, field) cpu_to_be64(__encode_bits(64, v, field))
> +
> #endif
>

Thanks again,
John


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-15 10:54    [W:0.054 / U:3.636 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site