| Message ID | 1550469571-25933-2-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | x86: turn off wrongly enabled CONFIG_GENERIC_HWEIGHT | expand |
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes: > __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation. > > Drivers should use the common API, hweight8(). > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> > This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2. > > Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken. > > This patch is trivial enough. > I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer > so that this can go in via x86 tree. Sounds good to me, feel free to push via the x86 tree.
Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: > Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes: > >> __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation. >> >> Drivers should use the common API, hweight8(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> > > Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> > >> This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2. >> >> Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken. >> >> This patch is trivial enough. >> I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer >> so that this can go in via x86 tree. > > Sounds good to me, feel free to push via the x86 tree. Actually, can you wait a bit? Felix just reminded me that we have a similar patch pending from Ben Hutchings: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10808203/ And it seems there are two instances of __sw_hweight8, at least in my wireless-drivers-next tree: drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int i, nstream = __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int n_chains = __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); So we need to think what to do.
Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: > Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: > >> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes: >> >>> __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation. >>> >>> Drivers should use the common API, hweight8(). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> >> >> Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> >> >>> This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2. >>> >>> Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken. >>> >>> This patch is trivial enough. >>> I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer >>> so that this can go in via x86 tree. >> >> Sounds good to me, feel free to push via the x86 tree. > > Actually, can you wait a bit? Felix just reminded me that we have a > similar patch pending from Ben Hutchings: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10808203/ > > And it seems there are two instances of __sw_hweight8, at least in my > wireless-drivers-next tree: > > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int i, nstream = > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int n_chains = > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); > > So we need to think what to do. I think the best would be that Felix applies Ben's patch to the wireless tree and I'll push it to Linus during the next merge window (via net-next). Simpler and less conflicts that way. So Masahiro, could you hold your x86 patch for a while until the mt76 patch will be in Linus' tree? That should not take more than two weeks, I think.
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 09:20:46PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote: > So Masahiro, could you hold your x86 patch for a while until the mt76 > patch will be in Linus' tree? That should not take more than two weeks, > I think. No hurry - I won't take it into the x86 now and queue it for 5.1 because it is not something urgent or fixing a bug or so. It is a cleanup and as such it can surely wait for 5.2, I'd say. Unless there are other aspects which I'm not thinking of right now... Thx.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:38 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: > > > Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: > > > >> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes: > >> > >>> __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation. > >>> > >>> Drivers should use the common API, hweight8(). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> > >> > >> Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> > >> > >>> This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2. > >>> > >>> Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken. > >>> > >>> This patch is trivial enough. > >>> I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer > >>> so that this can go in via x86 tree. > >> > >> Sounds good to me, feel free to push via the x86 tree. > > > > Actually, can you wait a bit? Felix just reminded me that we have a > > similar patch pending from Ben Hutchings: > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10808203/ > > > > And it seems there are two instances of __sw_hweight8, at least in my > > wireless-drivers-next tree: > > > > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int i, nstream = > > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); > > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int n_chains = > > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); > > > > So we need to think what to do. > > I think the best would be that Felix applies Ben's patch to the wireless > tree and I'll push it to Linus during the next merge window (via > net-next). Simpler and less conflicts that way. > > So Masahiro, could you hold your x86 patch for a while until the mt76 > patch will be in Linus' tree? That should not take more than two weeks, > I think. Sure. I will resend 2/2 later.
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:38 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote: >> >> Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: >> >> > Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> writes: >> > >> >> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> writes: >> >> >> >>> __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation. >> >>> >> >>> Drivers should use the common API, hweight8(). >> >>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> >> >> >> >> Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> >> >> >> >>> This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2. >> >>> >> >>> Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken. >> >>> >> >>> This patch is trivial enough. >> >>> I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer >> >>> so that this can go in via x86 tree. >> >> >> >> Sounds good to me, feel free to push via the x86 tree. >> > >> > Actually, can you wait a bit? Felix just reminded me that we have a >> > similar patch pending from Ben Hutchings: >> > >> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10808203/ >> > >> > And it seems there are two instances of __sw_hweight8, at least in my >> > wireless-drivers-next tree: >> > >> > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int i, nstream = >> > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); >> > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c: int n_chains = >> > __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); >> > >> > So we need to think what to do. >> >> I think the best would be that Felix applies Ben's patch to the wireless >> tree and I'll push it to Linus during the next merge window (via >> net-next). Simpler and less conflicts that way. >> >> So Masahiro, could you hold your x86 patch for a while until the mt76 >> patch will be in Linus' tree? That should not take more than two weeks, >> I think. > > Sure. > I will resend 2/2 later. Great, thanks!
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c b/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c index 7b926df..c42e0d3 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static void mt76_init_stream_cap(struct mt76_dev *dev, bool vht) { struct ieee80211_sta_ht_cap *ht_cap = &sband->ht_cap; - int i, nstream = __sw_hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); + int i, nstream = hweight8(dev->antenna_mask); struct ieee80211_sta_vht_cap *vht_cap; u16 mcs_map = 0;
__sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation. Drivers should use the common API, hweight8(). Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> --- This patch should go to x86 tree along with 2/2. Otherwise, all{yes,mod}config of x86 would be broken. This patch is trivial enough. I want ACK from the net/wireless maintainer so that this can go in via x86 tree. drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mac80211.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)