Re: [PATCH 1/9] bitfield: add FIELD_GET_SIGNED()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 01:36:12PM -0400, Yury Norov wrote:
> The bitfields are designed in assumption that fields contain unsigned
> integer values, thus extracting the values from the field implies
> zero-extending.
> 
> Some drivers need to sign-extend their fields, and currently do it like:
> 
> 	dc_re += sign_extend32(FIELD_GET(0xfff000, tmp), 11);
> 	dc_im += sign_extend32(FIELD_GET(0xfff, tmp), 11);
> 
> It's error-prone because it relies on user to provide the correct
> index of the most significant bit and proper 32 vs 64 function flavor.
> 
> Thus, introduce a FIELD_GET_SIGNED() macro, which is the more
> convenient and compiles (on x86_64) to just a couple instructions:
> shl and sar.

...

> +#define FIELD_GET_SIGNED(mask, reg)					\
> +	({								\
> +		__BF_FIELD_CHECK(mask, reg, 0U, "FIELD_GET_SIGNED: ");	\

> +		 ((__signed_scalar_typeof(mask))((long long)(reg) <<	\
> +		 __builtin_clzll(mask) >> (__builtin_clzll(mask) +	\
> +						__builtin_ctzll(mask))));\

I would re-indent these lines as
		 ((__signed_scalar_typeof(mask))
		  ((long long)(reg) << __builtin_clzll(mask) >>		\
		   (__builtin_clzll(mask) + __builtin_ctzll(mask))));	\
> +	})

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko