[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2ffed5fc-a372-3f90-e655-bcbc740eed33@solarflare.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 13:02:31 +0100
From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
CC: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <rds-devel@....oracle.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rds: ib: force endiannes annotation
On 29/04/2019 12:18, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 12:00:06PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
>> Again, a __force cast doesn't seem necessary here. It looks like the
>> code is just using the wrong types; if all of src, dst and uncongested
>> were __le64 instead of uint64_t, and the last two lines replaced with
>> rds_cong_map_updated(map, le64_to_cpu(uncongested)); then the semantics
>> would be kept with neither sparse errors nor __force.
>>
>> __force is almost never necessary and mostly just masks other bugs or
>> endianness confusion in the surrounding code. Instead of adding a
>> __force, either fix the code to be sparse-clean or leave the sparse
>> warning in place so that future developers know there's something not
>> right.
>>
> changing uncongested to __le64 is not an option here - it would only move
> the sparse warnings to those other locatoins where the ports that
> became uncongested are being or'ed into uncongested.
That's why I say to change *src and *dst too. Sparse won't mind the
conversion from void * to __le64 * when they're assigned, and the only
operations we do on them...
> uncongested |= ~(*src) & *dst;
> *dst++ = *src++;
... are some bitwise ops on the values (bitwise ops are legal in any
endianness) and incrementation of the pointers (which cares only about
the pointee size, not type).
-Ed
Powered by blists - more mailing lists