Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] bswap.h: Rework ntohl handling

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc>]

On 2025-07-15 14:52:01 [-0700], Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> writes:
> 
> > this series continues the rework of the bswap32/64()/ nothl() handling. 
> >
> > I've been looking at recent compiler and they manage to recognize the
> > manual shifting and use an optimize opcode if available. The ntohl
> > version provided by glibc already provides an "optimized" version which
> > makes an optimisation in git almost not needed.
> > One of the motivation behind overwriting/ providing an optimized
> > version was to provide a macro instead of using a function call. One
> > libc that is still providing ntohl as a function call is musl.
> >
> > While ntohl() is provided by the libc, the ntohll() is not. I found it
> > only on Windows provided by winsock.h.
> >
> > I haven't touched the put/get_be*() macros. gcc & clang are both smart
> > enough to swap the content accordingly and perform a single store/ load.
> > Only the msvc seems to strugle here and performs multiple bytes stores/
> > loads and shifts.
> >
> > v2…v3 https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250611221444.1567638-1-sebastian@breakpoint.cc/
> >   - Fixed typos in the patch description
> 
> Thanks for updating the proposed log messages with typofixes.  I
> understand the patch text has no changes?

The patches iteself remain unchanged, only the patch description of a
few got updated.
There was only one comment regarding using endian(3). At the same time I
got the feeling to first get this through and then we can think how to
continue further. glibc optimizes ntohl already so git might not have
to. I only found musl that has a function call. I didn't look on *BSD.
It just something is needed for ntohll().

> Thanks.

Sebastian