[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Devise macros to encapsulate (x & -x)
- To: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:37:25 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=MQZcb6yG9pa+bTxdicrPmRUOINb/8fuu25Jzm2t3d90=; b=anMfFziYshURe1t73O0mkvKrtjHATTDkM2jKhXqkk5dOc75AbzGZ04+UAsh3DXl6AfVwSOX32e+Jh686cT6o2OuakX3w7xT3CRamDqi7bgcLobVp7I3tYzX3a6IeG2id8zts8DqRVeBXEln4/mG06nJx8em0ToH3rJMkqQd3mpFj4+yYpw3XU5YfaLFhLWtUTl+Vza/XpMyppy2vhb3/73Zt6zU5AQK3mGXXPqXpKLybMy6skKURfNscFQnOLWfxWAMr5AlRU6WhZNC+elDfOq6aHt/LCwqgwKfJYLTFnJLrfGDNvTw1JuemRFMUgTUVYzpmyqex56IHIanKY29KWQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Rum8oQOR3iQGk0IZvzRFHipmz/psfcMRMupdeLlkIuB9CogMyAlRMCInTuU7I0LWg/2AKe6uoM3mi97IHkJoOM6u9b/GXdpiC5x1nGSnPoYxgTsKxs/wFz+sAq+uAd0ILPqsJe8OtNuY4X2ylRNX+lR3yiYcCVdwSmHw74Eje1u9xRfr0+twhboujFxBdXIGPpMU12XilVi0BpHA3zSb2ESFOKEvU8HxLDNDsYG2tyKymVXekfOCZsClWW2p38bEcB8DSZg9/7wh9Em7IKqfE3fXPVKM2ehfNga1ai+Kye46NkHRBeLYsi0TaxHL69zouSmDAnxX6+qmOPGdM9agAg==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Consulting <consulting@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:37:52 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 17.11.2023 12:15, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
> On 2023-11-17 12:04, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 17/11/2023 10:17 am, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> As discussed in this thread [1], which is about complying with MISRA C
>>> Rule 10.1,
>>> a macro was introduced to encapsulate a well-known construct:
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * Given an unsigned integer argument, expands to a mask where just
>>> the least
>>> * significant nonzero bit of the argument is set, or 0 if no bits are
>>> set.
>>> */
>>> #define ISOLATE_LSB(x) ((x) & -(x))
>>>
>>> This macro has a gained some calls in the subsequent patches in that
>>> thread, but concerns were raised around the fact that it would be
>>> better to devise a macro that evaluates its argument only once. A
>>> proposed solution is this (thanks to Jan Beulich):
>>>
>>> #define ISOLATE_LSB(x) ({ \
>>> typeof(x) x_ = (x); \
>>> x_ & -x_; \
>>> })
>>
>> Of course this was going to explode.
>>
>> This isn't even the first time an unwise attempt to do
>> single-evaluation
>> has needed to be reverted because it doesn't work with Integer Constant
>> Expressions.
>>
>> Switch it back to the first form. It's obviously a macro to begin
>> with,
>> and not likely to be used in cases that have side effects.
I guess Nicola's original mail was lacking some pieces. After the issue
with the statement expression form was pointed out, I never asked to
replace the existing (already committed, ...
> Actually no usages of either forms are yet committed, just the
> definition of the first form, so nothing needs to be reverted.
... with actual uses in MASK_EXTR() and MASK_INSR()) macro. Instead I
was suggesting to have a _second_ macro for use wherever Integer Constant
Expressions aren't the limiting factor. E.g. isolate_lsb(), deliberately
lower-case to look more like a function (and thus communicating that its
argument indeed is going to be evaluated only once, as would be the case
if the whole thing was a function).
Jan
|