Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1634406 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-05-02 15:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-05-03 03:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH] bitops.h: use BITS_PER_LONG to simplify BITS_TO_LONGS Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 15:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] bitops.h: use BITS_PER_LONG to simplify BITS_TO_LONGS NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> - 2017-05-02 23:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH] bitops.h: use BITS_PER_LONG to simplify BITS_TO_LONGS Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 03:10 +0200
| From | Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-02 15:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] bitops.h: use BITS_PER_LONG to simplify BITS_TO_LONGS |
| Message-ID | <tCG2l-7dm-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
Hi, masters Not sure this one is acceptable? On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 08:37:43AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote: >The second parameter is the number of bits for type "long", which is >already defined in header file. > >This patch replace the calculation with macro to make it more readable. > >Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> >--- > include/linux/bitops.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >diff --git a/include/linux/bitops.h b/include/linux/bitops.h >index a83c822c35c2..923fe72d31e3 100644 >--- a/include/linux/bitops.h >+++ b/include/linux/bitops.h >@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ > #define BIT_ULL_MASK(nr) (1ULL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG_LONG)) > #define BIT_ULL_WORD(nr) ((nr) / BITS_PER_LONG_LONG) > #define BITS_PER_BYTE 8 >-#define BITS_TO_LONGS(nr) DIV_ROUND_UP(nr, BITS_PER_BYTE * sizeof(long)) >+#define BITS_TO_LONGS(nr) DIV_ROUND_UP(nr, BITS_PER_LONG) > #endif > > /* >-- >2.11.0 -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-02 23:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tCNQd-3I8-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1634406 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Tue, May 02 2017, Wei Yang wrote: > Hi, masters > > Not sure this one is acceptable? You'd have better luck getting a response if you post things like this to akpm - he tends to collect miscellaneous bits and pieces. I don't think the patch makes more that a tiny improvement and I wouldn't bother with it, but maybe Andrew will. NeilBrown > > On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 08:37:43AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote: >>The second parameter is the number of bits for type "long", which is >>already defined in header file. >> >>This patch replace the calculation with macro to make it more readable. >> >>Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> >>--- >> include/linux/bitops.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >>diff --git a/include/linux/bitops.h b/include/linux/bitops.h >>index a83c822c35c2..923fe72d31e3 100644 >>--- a/include/linux/bitops.h >>+++ b/include/linux/bitops.h >>@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ >> #define BIT_ULL_MASK(nr) (1ULL << ((nr) % BITS_PER_LONG_LONG)) >> #define BIT_ULL_WORD(nr) ((nr) / BITS_PER_LONG_LONG) >> #define BITS_PER_BYTE 8 >>-#define BITS_TO_LONGS(nr) DIV_ROUND_UP(nr, BITS_PER_BYTE * sizeof(long)) >>+#define BITS_TO_LONGS(nr) DIV_ROUND_UP(nr, BITS_PER_LONG) >> #endif >> >> /* >>-- >>2.11.0 > > -- > Wei Yang > Help you, Help me
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-03 03:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tCQXL-5Rp-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1634633 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 07:45:12AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote: >On Tue, May 02 2017, Wei Yang wrote: > >> Hi, masters >> >> Not sure this one is acceptable? > >You'd have better luck getting a response if you post things like this >to akpm - he tends to collect miscellaneous bits and pieces. >I don't think the patch makes more that a tiny improvement and I >wouldn't bother with it, but maybe Andrew will. > >NeilBrown > Yep, thanks for your comment :-) -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web