Re: + fls-change-parameter-to-unsigned-int.patch added to -mm tree

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 06:14:44PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 03:33:01PM -0800, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > -static inline int fls(int x)
> > +static inline int fls(unsigned int x)
> >  {
> > -	return fls64((unsigned int) x);
> > +	return fls64(x);
> >  }
> 
> Should it return "unsigned"? Logically it should.
> I remember doing this and there was some code size increase :-(

Yes, it returns a number in the range [0-32], so it can absolutely
be unsigned.  I'm kind of surprised it made any difference.

When you say "doing this", what did you try?  unsigned fls(unsigned),
int fls(unsigned) or unsigned fls(int) ?