lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/5] dma-direct: add an explicit dma_direct_get_required_mask
From
Date
On 27/09/18 16:28, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 03:12:25PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>> +u64 dma_direct_get_required_mask(struct device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> + u64 max_dma = phys_to_dma_direct(dev, (max_pfn - 1) << PAGE_SHIFT);
>>> +
>>> + return (1ULL << (fls64(max_dma) - 1)) * 2 - 1;
>>
>> I think that may as well just use __fls64() - it seems reasonable to assume
>> max_dma > 0. Otherwise,
>
> Is there any good reason to micro-optimize given that this isn't
> a fast path?

Not at all, I wasn't even thinking in terms of optimisation other than
in terms of number of source characters and levels of parentheses.

But more importantly I was also being a big idiot because no matter how
much I have the fls()/__fls() thing in mind, __fls64() doesn't actually
exist. Nitpick rescinded!

Robin.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-27 17:36    [W:0.053 / U:0.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site