On 14.03.2024 17:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 14/03/2024 2:16 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 13.03.2024 18:27, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
>>> @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static inline int fls(unsigned int x)
>>> }
>>>
>>>
On 14/03/2024 2:16 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.03.2024 18:27, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
>> @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static inline int fls(unsigned int x)
>> }
>>
>>
>> -#define ffs(x) ({ unsigned int __t = (x); fls(
On 13.03.2024 18:27, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h
> @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static inline int fls(unsigned int x)
> }
>
>
> -#define ffs(x) ({ unsigned int __t = (x); fls(ISOLATE_LSB(__t)); })
> +#define arch_ffs(x) ({ uns
Allow the optimiser to elimiate the call completely, and use the compiler
builtin by default. Architectures should only proide arch_ffs() if they think
they can do better than the compiler.
Confirm the expected behaviour with compile time and boot time tests.
For x86, correct the prototype, and
