Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: simplify kvm_vector_to_index()

[Jürgen Groß <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 20.08.25 16:12, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 04:01:22PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > On 20.08.25 15:42, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 04:12:11PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 21:58:45 -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> > > > > Use find_nth_bit() and make the function almost a one-liner.
> > > >
> > > > Applied to kvm-x86 misc, thanks!
> > > >
> > > > P.S. I'm amazed you could decipher the intent of the code.  Even with your
> > > >        patch, it took me 10+ minutes to understand the "logic".
> > >
> > > Thanks Sean. :)
> > >
> > > > [1/1] kvm: x86: simplify kvm_vector_to_index()
> > > >         https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/cc63f918a215
> >
> > Is this really correct?
> >
> > The original code has:
> >
> > 	for (i = 0; i <= mod; i++)
> >
> > (note the "<=").
> >
> > So it will find the (mod + 1)th bit set, so shouldn't it use
> >
> > 	idx = find_nth_bit(bitmap, bitmap_size, (vector % dest_vcpus) + 1);
> >
> > instead?
> >
> > My remark assumes that find_nth_bit(bitmap, bitmap_size, 1) will return the
> > same value as find_first_bit(bitmap, bitmap_size).
>
> find_nth_bit indexes those bits starting from 0, so
Ah, okay. That was the part I wasn't sure about, hence the addition of
my assumption regarding the semantics of find_nth_bit() (looking into the
__find_nth_bit() code didn't make that obvious at once).

Thanks for the clarification.


Juergen

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature