Re: [tip: x86/boot] x86/bootflag: Replace open-coded parity calculation with parity8()

[Kuan-Wei Chiu]

Hi Ingo,

On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 01:15:13PM -0000, tip-bot2 for Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> The following commit has been merged into the x86/boot branch of tip:
> 
> Commit-ID:     9c94c14ca39577b6324c667d8450ffa19fc1e5c4
> Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/9c94c14ca39577b6324c667d8450ffa19fc1e5c4
> Author:        Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@xxxxxxxxx>
> AuthorDate:    Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:55:45 +01:00
> Committer:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CommitterDate: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 14:00:30 +01:00
> 
> x86/bootflag: Replace open-coded parity calculation with parity8()
> 
> Refactor parity calculations to use the standard parity8() helper. This
> change eliminates redundant implementations and improves code
> efficiency.
> 
> [ ubizjak: Updated the patch to apply to the latest x86 tree. ]
> 
> Co-developed-by: Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250227125616.2253774-1-ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx

Thanks for accepting this patch.

Based on the previous email discussion, I plan to rename parity8() to
parity_odd() in the next version of the parity patch series (though I'm
not too confident it will be accepted...). If I base the series on the
current linux-next tree, it might cause conflicts when other
maintainers apply it to their own trees. On the other hand, if I base
it on Linus's tree, it would conflict with the x86 tree.

I'm not sure which tree I should base the next version on. Since this
series touches multiple subsystems, the situation is a bit tricky.

Regards,
Kuan-Wei