[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1485577703.2980.104.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 15:28:23 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
Ashley Lai <ashleydlai@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@...horst.net>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ibmvtpm byteswapping inconsistency
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 12:32 -0800, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> Its possible being the end of the week I'm just a little dense, but
> wouldn't be64_to_cpu() imply that we are byte-swapping something that is
> already, or supposedly already, in BE format to cpu endianness? Which on
> a BE cpu I would expect a no-op, and on a LE cpu the 64bit word to have
> been swapped from BE --> LE?
It's in BE format in memory. In LE mode, loading it into a register will
get it the wrong way around, thus we have to swap it again. Once in a
register it has no "endianness" per-se, what matters is that the act
of loading from memory to a register would have loaded it the wrong
way around in LE.
> In my eyes the code does seem to support what I've argued. The same
> thing is done in the scsi VIO drivers. The CRQ structure is laid out and
> annotated BE. We use cpu_to_be() calls to load any non 8bit field.
> Finally, each word is swapped to cpu endian when we hand it off for the
> hcall.
>
> from ibmvfc_send_event():
>
> __be64 *crq_as_u64 = (__be64 *) &evt->crq;
>
> <..snip..>
>
> if ((rc = ibmvfc_send_crq(vhost, be64_to_cpu(crq_as_u64[0]),
> be64_to_cpu(crq_as_u64[1])))) {
>
> Again, maybe I'm missing something.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists