Re: [PATCH 1/2] wireless: mt76: call hweight8() instead of __sw_hweight8()

[Kalle Valo]

Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:38 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> >
>> >> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> >>
>> >>> __sw_hweight8() is just internal implementation.
>> >>>
>> >>> Drivers should use the common API, hweight8().
>> >>>
>> >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>
>> >> Acked-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>
>> >>> 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!

-- 
Kalle Valo