All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>
Cc: openib-general@openib.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH  09/13] Core WQE/CQE Types
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:02:44 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1163782964.8457.35.camel@stevo-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <adaveleof4f.fsf@cisco.com>

On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 20:45 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
>  > +struct t3_send_wr {
>  > +	struct fw_riwrh wrh;	/* 0 */
>  > +	union t3_wrid wrid;	/* 1 */
>  > +
>  > +	enum t3_rdma_opcode rdmaop:8;
>  > +	u32 reserved:24;	/* 2 */
> 
> Does this do the right thing wrt endianness?  I'd be more comfortable
> with something like
> 
> 	u8 rdmaop;
>         u8 reserved[3];
> 
> (although the __attribute__((packed)) on enum t3_rdma_opcode does make
> it OK to use here, I guess)
> 
>  > +	u32 rem_stag;		/* 2 */
>  > +	u32 plen;		/* 3 */
>  > +	u32 num_sgle;
>  > +	struct t3_sge sgl[T3_MAX_SGE];	/* 4+ */
>  > +};


I don't really like the bit fields either. I inherited these structs and
I'm not adverse to changing them as you suggest to get rid of bit
fields.  But I think they are correct wrt endianness.  I wrote a test
program and on a LE machine it put the u8 first in memory followed by
the 24 bit reserved.  However, I think if you use bit fields less than 8
bits its not endian safe.

BTW:  I don't have a PPC system (yet) to test this code on BE...

Here's a dumb program that plays around with bit fields...

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <inttypes.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>

struct foo {
	uint32_t 	a:8;
	uint32_t 	b:24;
	uint32_t	c:16;
	uint32_t	d:8;
	uint32_t	e:8;
};

struct bar {
	uint8_t		a;
	uint8_t		b[3];
	uint16_t	c;
	uint8_t		d;
	uint8_t		e;
};

struct bits {
#if 0 /* BE */
	uint32_t	a:4;
	uint32_t	b:4;
#else /* LE */
	uint32_t	b:4;
	uint32_t	a:4;
#endif
	uint32_t	c:8;
	uint32_t	d:8;
	uint32_t	e:8;
};

main()
{
	struct foo foo;
	struct bar bar;
	struct bits bits;
	uint8_t *cp;
	int i;

	foo.a = 0x01;
	foo.b = 0x020304;
	foo.c = 0x0506;
	foo.d = 0x07;
	foo.e = 0x08;

	printf("foo cpu: 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", *(uint64_t *)&foo);
	printf("foo mem: ");
	cp = (uint8_t *)&foo;
	for (i=0; i<8; i++)
		printf("%02x", *cp++);
	printf("\n");

	bar.a = 0x01;
	bar.b[0] = 0x02;
	bar.b[1] = 0x03;
	bar.b[2] = 0x04;
	bar.c = 0x0506;
	bar.d = 0x07;
	bar.e = 0x08;

	printf("bar cpu: 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", *(uint64_t *)&bar);
	printf("bar mem: ");
	cp = (uint8_t *)&bar;
	for (i=0; i<8; i++)
		printf("%02x", *cp++);
	printf("\n");


	bits.a = 0x1;
	bits.b = 0x2;
	bits.c = 0x3;
	bits.d = 0x4;
	bits.e = 0x5;
	
	printf("bits cpu: 0x%08x\n", *(uint32_t *)&bits);
	printf("bar mem: ");
	cp = (uint8_t *)&bits;
	for (i=0; i<4; i++)
		printf("%02x", *cp++);
	printf("\n");
}





WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Steve Wise" <swise@opengridcomputing.com>
To: "Roland Dreier" <rdreier@cisco.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	openib-general@openib.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH  09/13] Core WQE/CQE Types
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 11:02:44 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1163782964.8457.35.camel@stevo-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <adaveleof4f.fsf@cisco.com>

On Thu, 2006-11-16 at 20:45 -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:
>  > +struct t3_send_wr {
>  > +	struct fw_riwrh wrh;	/* 0 */
>  > +	union t3_wrid wrid;	/* 1 */
>  > +
>  > +	enum t3_rdma_opcode rdmaop:8;
>  > +	u32 reserved:24;	/* 2 */
> 
> Does this do the right thing wrt endianness?  I'd be more comfortable
> with something like
> 
> 	u8 rdmaop;
>         u8 reserved[3];
> 
> (although the __attribute__((packed)) on enum t3_rdma_opcode does make
> it OK to use here, I guess)
> 
>  > +	u32 rem_stag;		/* 2 */
>  > +	u32 plen;		/* 3 */
>  > +	u32 num_sgle;
>  > +	struct t3_sge sgl[T3_MAX_SGE];	/* 4+ */
>  > +};


I don't really like the bit fields either. I inherited these structs and
I'm not adverse to changing them as you suggest to get rid of bit
fields.  But I think they are correct wrt endianness.  I wrote a test
program and on a LE machine it put the u8 first in memory followed by
the 24 bit reserved.  However, I think if you use bit fields less than 8
bits its not endian safe.

BTW:  I don't have a PPC system (yet) to test this code on BE...

Here's a dumb program that plays around with bit fields...

#include <sys/types.h>
#include <inttypes.h>
#include <stdint.h>
#include <stdio.h>

struct foo {
	uint32_t 	a:8;
	uint32_t 	b:24;
	uint32_t	c:16;
	uint32_t	d:8;
	uint32_t	e:8;
};

struct bar {
	uint8_t		a;
	uint8_t		b[3];
	uint16_t	c;
	uint8_t		d;
	uint8_t		e;
};

struct bits {
#if 0 /* BE */
	uint32_t	a:4;
	uint32_t	b:4;
#else /* LE */
	uint32_t	b:4;
	uint32_t	a:4;
#endif
	uint32_t	c:8;
	uint32_t	d:8;
	uint32_t	e:8;
};

main()
{
	struct foo foo;
	struct bar bar;
	struct bits bits;
	uint8_t *cp;
	int i;

	foo.a = 0x01;
	foo.b = 0x020304;
	foo.c = 0x0506;
	foo.d = 0x07;
	foo.e = 0x08;

	printf("foo cpu: 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", *(uint64_t *)&foo);
	printf("foo mem: ");
	cp = (uint8_t *)&foo;
	for (i=0; i<8; i++)
		printf("%02x", *cp++);
	printf("\n");

	bar.a = 0x01;
	bar.b[0] = 0x02;
	bar.b[1] = 0x03;
	bar.b[2] = 0x04;
	bar.c = 0x0506;
	bar.d = 0x07;
	bar.e = 0x08;

	printf("bar cpu: 0x%" PRIx64 "\n", *(uint64_t *)&bar);
	printf("bar mem: ");
	cp = (uint8_t *)&bar;
	for (i=0; i<8; i++)
		printf("%02x", *cp++);
	printf("\n");


	bits.a = 0x1;
	bits.b = 0x2;
	bits.c = 0x3;
	bits.d = 0x4;
	bits.e = 0x5;
	
	printf("bits cpu: 0x%08x\n", *(uint32_t *)&bits);
	printf("bar mem: ");
	cp = (uint8_t *)&bits;
	for (i=0; i<4; i++)
		printf("%02x", *cp++);
	printf("\n");
}

  reply	other threads:[~2006-11-17 17:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-11-16  3:58 [PATCH 00/13] Chelsio T3 RDMA Driver Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58 ` [PATCH 01/13] Linux RDMA Core Changes Steve Wise
2006-11-16 19:41   ` Roland Dreier
2006-11-16  3:58 ` [PATCH 02/13] Device Discovery and ULLD Linkage Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58   ` Steve Wise
2006-11-17 17:53   ` [openib-general] " Bryan O'Sullivan
2006-11-17 17:59     ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58 ` [PATCH 03/13] Provider Methods and Data Structures Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58   ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58 ` [PATCH 04/13] Connection Manager Steve Wise
2006-11-17 18:07   ` [openib-general] " Bryan O'Sullivan
2006-11-17 18:26     ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58 ` [PATCH 05/13] Queue Pairs Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58   ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58 ` [PATCH 06/13] Completion Queues Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:58   ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 07/13] Async Event Handler Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59   ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 08/13] Memory Registration Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59   ` Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 09/13] Core WQE/CQE Types Steve Wise
2006-11-17  4:45   ` Roland Dreier
2006-11-17 17:02     ` Steve Wise [this message]
2006-11-17 17:02       ` Steve Wise
2006-11-17 18:19   ` [openib-general] " Bryan O'Sullivan
2006-11-17 18:32     ` Steve Wise
2006-11-17 18:45       ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 10/13] Core HAL Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 11/13] Core Resource Allocation Steve Wise
2006-11-17 16:54   ` Roland Dreier
2006-11-17 17:25     ` Steve Wise
2006-11-17 20:37       ` Roland Dreier
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 12/13] Core Debug functions Steve Wise
2006-11-16  3:59 ` [PATCH 13/13] Kconfig/Makefile Steve Wise

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1163782964.8457.35.camel@stevo-desktop \
    --to=swise@opengridcomputing.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=openib-general@openib.org \
    --cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.