On 06.05.2024 12:15, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: > Changes in V9: > - update return type of fls and flsl() to unsigned int to be aligned with > other > bit ops.
But this then needs carrying through to ... > --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/arm64/bitops.h > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/arm64/bitops.h > @@ -22,17 +22,15 @@ static /*__*/always_inline unsigned long __ffs(unsigned > long word) > */ > #define ffz(x) __ffs(~(x)) > > -static inline int flsl(unsigned long x) > +static inline int arch_flsl(unsigned long x) ... e.g. here. You don't want to introduce signed/unsigned mismatches. Also why do you keep "inline" here, while ... > --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h > @@ -425,7 +425,7 @@ static always_inline unsigned int arch_ffsl(unsigned long > x) > * > * This is defined the same way as ffs. > */ > -static inline int flsl(unsigned long x) > +static always_inline int arch_flsl(unsigned long x) ... you switch to always_inline here? (replying out of order) > --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/arm32/bitops.h > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/arm32/bitops.h > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > #ifndef _ARM_ARM32_BITOPS_H > #define _ARM_ARM32_BITOPS_H > > -#define flsl fls > +#define arch_flsl fls It's the Arm maintainers to ultimately judge, but I'd be inclined to suggest #define arch_flsl arch_fls instead. That's not only behaviorally closer to what was there before, but also reduces (a tiny bit) the amount of work the compiler needs to carry out. Jan
