Re: [PATCH v2 next 06/11] tools/nolibc/printf: Use bit-masks to hold requested flag, length and conversion chars

[David Laight]

On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 20:52:49 +0100
Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 2026-02-06 19:11:16+0000, david.laight.linux@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Use flags bits (1u << (ch & 31)) for the flags, length modifiers, and
> > conversion specifiers.
> > This makes it easy to test for multiple values at once.
> > 
> > Detect the conversion flags " #+-0" although they are currently all ignored.
> > 
> > Add support for length modifiers 't' and 'z' (both long) and 'q' and 'L'
> > (both long long).
> > 
> > Add support for "%i" (the same as %d").  
> 
> Would it be much work to split the new functionality into its own patch?
> > 
> > Unconditionally generate the signed values (for %d) to remove a second
> > set of checks for the size.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > 
> > Changes for v2:
> > - Use #defines to make the code a lot more readable.
> > - Include the changes from the old patch 10 that used masks for the
> >   conversion specifiers.
> > - Detect all the valid flag characters even though they are not implemented.
> > - Support for left justifying field is moved to patch 7.
> > 
> >  tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h | 151 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >  1 file changed, 103 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h b/tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h
> > index bb54f488c228..b14cf8224403 100644
> > --- a/tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h
> > +++ b/tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h
> > @@ -240,19 +240,44 @@ char *fgets(char *s, int size, FILE *stream)
> >  }
> >  
> >  
> > -/* minimal printf(). It supports the following formats:
> > - *  - %[l*]{d,u,c,x,p}
> > - *  - %s
> > - *  - unknown modifiers are ignored.
> > +/* simple printf(). It supports the following formats:
> > + *  - %[-][width][{l,t,z,ll,L,j,q}]{d,u,c,x,p,s,m,%}
> > + *  - %%
> > + *  - invalid formats are copied to the output buffer
> >   */
> > +
> > +/* This code uses 'flag' variables that are indexed by the low 6 bits
> > + * of characters to optimise checks for multiple characters.
> > + *
> > + * _NOLIBC_PF_FLAGS_CONTAIN(flags, 'a', 'b'. ...)
> > + * returns non-zero if the bit for any of the specified characters is set.
> > + *
> > + * _NOLIBC_PF_CHAR_IS_ONE_OF(ch, 'a', 'b'. ...)
> > + * returns the flag bit for ch if it is one of the specified characters.
> > + * All the characters must be in the same 32 character block (non-alphabetic,
> > + * upper case, or lower case) of the ASCII character set.)
> > + */
> > +#define _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG(ch) (1u << ((ch) & 0x1f))
> > +#define _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(ch) ((ch) ? _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG(ch) : 0)
> > +#define _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG8(cmp_1, cmp_2, cmp_3, cmp_4, cmp_5, cmp_6, cmp_7, cmp_8, ...) \
> > +	(_NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_1) | _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_2) | \
> > +	 _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_3) | _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_4) | \
> > +	 _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_5) | _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_6) | \
> > +	 _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_7) | _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG_NZ(cmp_8))
> > +#define _NOLIBC_PF_FLAGS_CONTAIN(flags, ...) \
> > +	((flags) & _NOLIBC_PF_FLAG8(__VA_ARGS__, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0))
> > +#define _NOLIBC_PF_CHAR_IS_ONE_OF(ch, cmp_1, ...) \
> > +	(ch < (cmp_1 & ~0x1f) || ch > (cmp_1 | 0x1f) ? 0 : \
> > +		_NOLIBC_PF_FLAGS_CONTAIN(_NOLIBC_PF_FLAG(ch), cmp_1, __VA_ARGS__))  
> 
> With signed chars I get:
> 
> sysroot/i386/include/stdio.h:321:37: error: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type [-Werror=type-limits]
>   321 |         (ch < (cmp_1 & ~0x1f) || ch > (cmp_1 | 0x1f) ? 0 : \

Stupid type-limits warning.
It is almost impossible to get rid of without making the code unreadable.

>       |                                     ^
> sysroot/i386/include/stdio.h:389:35: note: in expansion of macro '_NOLIBC_PF_CHAR_IS_ONE_OF'
>   389 |                         ch_flag = _NOLIBC_PF_CHAR_IS_ONE_OF(ch, 'c', 'd', 'i', 'u', 'x', 'p');
>       |
> 
> This can be fixed by switching 'ch' to be always unsigned.

That's likely to provoke another error elsewhere.
In any case optimising that test away makes the code smaller!

> 
> You can run the the builtin test suite like this:
> -p triggers the download of the toolchains
> -l uses LLVM/clang instead of the downloaded toolchain
> 
> $ cd tools/testing/selftests/nolibc
> $ ./run-tests.sh -m user -p
> $ ./run-tests.sh -m user -l

I've just been running:
	rm nolibc-test; make -O /path/.../dir && ./nolibc-test printf

> 
> > +
> >  typedef int (*__nolibc_printf_cb)(void *state, const char *buf, size_t size);
> >  
> >  static __attribute__((unused, format(printf, 3, 0)))
> >  int __nolibc_printf(__nolibc_printf_cb cb, void *state, const char *fmt, va_list args)
> >  {
> > -	char lpref, ch;
> > -	unsigned long long v;
> > +	char ch;
> >  	unsigned int written, width;
> > +	unsigned int flags, ch_flag;
> >  	size_t len;
> >  	char tmpbuf[21];
> >  	const char *outstr;
> > @@ -265,6 +290,7 @@ int __nolibc_printf(__nolibc_printf_cb cb, void *state, const char *fmt, va_list
> >  			break;
> >  
> >  		width = 0;
> > +		flags = 0;
> >  		if (ch != '%') {
> >  			while (*fmt && *fmt != '%')
> >  				fmt++;
> > @@ -274,6 +300,14 @@ int __nolibc_printf(__nolibc_printf_cb cb, void *state, const char *fmt, va_list
> >  
> >  			ch = *fmt++;
> >  
> > +			/* Conversion flag characters */
> > +			for (;; ch = *fmt++) {
> > +				ch_flag = _NOLIBC_PF_CHAR_IS_ONE_OF(ch, ' ', '#', '+', '-', '0');
> > +				if (!ch_flag)
> > +					break;
> > +				flags |= ch_flag;
> > +			}  
> 
> What is the advantage of this over:
> 
> while (1) {
> 	/* ... */
> 
> 	ch = *fmt++;
> }

One line shorter :-)

> 
> Or combine it with the 'ch = *fmt++' from above and do:
> 
> while (1) {
> 	ch = *fmt++;
> 
> 	/* ... */
> }
> 
> These look much simpler to me.

The code always needs to get a new character after using one.
So you come out of each bit of code with the 'next char to check' in ch.
Which means you need a new character at the end of the loop for the next
iteration.

> 
> > +
> >  			/* width */
> >  			while (ch >= '0' && ch <= '9') {
> >  				width *= 10;  
> 
> (...)
> 
> > +do_output:
> >  		written += len;
> >  
> > +		/* An OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR() seems to stop gcc back-merging this
> > +		 * code into one of the conditionals above.
> > +		 */
> > +		__asm__ volatile("" : "=r"(len) : "0"(len));  
> 
> Can we make a definition in nolibc/compiler.h out of this?

I've added _NOLIBC_OPTIMIZER_HIDE_VAR() to compiler.h in the draft of v3.

> Why the 'volatile'? Wo don't have that in the kernel.

I probably wrote that before looking up the kernel definition.

> Why separate input and ouput arguments instead of one combined one ('+r')?
> I have been wondering the same about the kernel definition, too.

I'm not sure either.
Certainly "+r" is more modern - which is why it isn't used in a lot of places.
They may be identical (indeed "+r" might get converted to the "0" form),
but maybe it gives better separation - I just copied the same version.

	David

> 
> > +
> >  		while (width > len) {
> >  			unsigned int pad_len = ((width - len - 1) & 15) + 1;
> >  			width -= pad_len;
> > -- 
> > 2.39.5
> >