On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 06:20:02AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> Umm... What's wrong with
>
> #define FIELD_FOO 0,4
> #define FIELD_BAR 6,12
> #define FIELD_BAZ 18,14
>
> A macro can bloody well expand to any sequence of tokens - le32_get_bits(v,
> FIELD_BAZ)
> will become le32_get_bits(v, 18, 14) just fine. What's the problem with that?
FWIW, if you want to use the mask, __builtin_ffsll() is not the only way to do
it - you don't need the shift. Multiplier would do just as well, and that can
be had easier. If mask = (2*a + 1)<<n = ((2*a)<<n) ^ (1<<n), then
mask - 1 = ((2*a) << n) + ((1<<n) - 1) = ((2*n) << n) ^ ((1<<n) - 1)
mask ^ (mask - 1) = (1<<n) + ((1<<n) - 1)
and
mask & (mask ^ (mask - 1)) = 1<<n.
IOW, with
static __always_inline u64 mask_to_multiplier(u64 mask)
{
return mask & (mask ^ (mask - 1));
}
we could do
static __always_inline __le64 le64_replace_bits(__le64 old, u64 v, u64 mask)
{
__le64 m = cpu_to_le64(mask);
return (old & ~m) | (cpu_to_le64(v * mask_to_multiplier(mask)) & m);
}
static __always_inline u64 le64_get_bits(__le64 v, u64 mask)
{
return (le64_to_cpu(v) & mask) / mask_to_multiplier(mask);
}
etc. Compiler will turn those into shifts... I can live with either calling
conventions.
Comments?
