tree b8cf70f1d314c519030b6ae387d76313a0698616
parent 626d114f46fedb66f56bfbea4743ab68ab88e590
author Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com> 1449198241 -0500
committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 1449686116 -0800

bitops.h: correctly handle rol32 with 0 byte shift

ROL on a 32 bit integer with a shift of 32 or more is undefined and the
result is arch-dependent. Avoid this by handling the trivial case of
roling by 0 correctly.

The trivial solution of checking if shift is 0 breaks gcc's detection
of this code as a ROL instruction, which is unacceptable.

This bug was reported and fixed in GCC
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57157):

	The standard rotate idiom,

	  (x << n) | (x >> (32 - n))

	is recognized by gcc (for concreteness, I discuss only the case that x
	is an uint32_t here).

	However, this is portable C only for n in the range 0 < n < 32. For n
	== 0, we get x >> 32 which gives undefined behaviour according to the
	C standard (6.5.7, Bitwise shift operators). To portably support n ==
	0, one has to write the rotate as something like

	  (x << n) | (x >> ((-n) & 31))

	And this is apparently not recognized by gcc.

Note that this is broken on older GCCs and will result in slower ROL.

Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>