[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190321003426.GB2097@jagdpanzerIV>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 09:34:26 +0900
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Martin Lau <kafai@...com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 bpf-next 1/3] bpf, tests: tweak endianness selection
On (03/20/19 15:27), Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
[..]
> > Inside kernel clang compiler header (linux/compiler-clang.h) does not
> > define __HAVE_BUILTIN_BSWAP16__. So it will go to the "else" branch in
> > the above. So I think it should work with clang + bpf.
> Hm, isn't it the opposite of what we want then? I think for llvm+bpf we always
> want to use the builtins to make it properly generate
> BPF_TO_BE/BPF_TO_LE instructions.
Oh, hmm, OK. I see your point now. bpf insn set for variables.
-ss
Powered by blists - more mailing lists