Re: [PATCH] lib/find_bit: Add find_prev_*_bit functions.

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 08:50:24PM +0900, Yun Levi wrote:
> Thanks for kind advice. But I'm so afraid to have questions below:
> 
>  > - it proposes functionality w/o user (dead code)
>      Actually, I add these series functions to rewrite some of the
> resource clean-up routine.
>      A typical case is ethtool_set_per_queue_coalesce 's rollback label.
>      Could this usage be an actual use case?

Then create it as a patch in the series and in cover letter (0 message when you
supply --cover-letter to your `git format-patch ...` command line) mention
this.

>  >- it lacks extension of the bitmap test module to cover the new
>  > functions (that also wants to be a separate patch).
>      I see, then Could I add some of testcase on lib/test_bitops.c for testing?

Sounds good to me. Most important is to have test cases, then we will see which
test suite is the best fit, but as I said sounds like a good shot.

And please do not top post in replies!

> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 7:04 PM Rasmus Villemoes
> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 02/12/2020 10.47, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 10:10:09AM +0900, Yun Levi wrote:
> > >> Inspired find_next_*bit function series, add find_prev_*_bit series.
> > >> I'm not sure whether it'll be used right now But, I add these functions
> > >> for future usage.
> > >
> > > This patch has few issues:
> > > - it has more things than described (should be several patches instead)
> > > - new functionality can be split logically to couple or more pieces as well
> > > - it proposes functionality w/o user (dead code)
> >
> > Yeah, the last point means it can't be applied - please submit it again
> > if and when you have an actual use case. And I'll add
> >
> > - it lacks extension of the bitmap test module to cover the new
> > functions (that also wants to be a separate patch).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko