[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aWzYj1cfVuhHpGCO@stanley.mountain>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 15:56:47 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Piotr Kwapulinski <piotr.kwapulinski@...el.com>
Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
horms@...nel.org,
Aleksandr Loktionov <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next 1/2] ixgbe: e610: add missing endianness
conversion
On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 01:23:53PM +0100, Piotr Kwapulinski wrote:
> Fix a possible ACI issue on big-endian platforms.
>
> Fixes: 46761fd52a88 ("ixgbe: Add support for E610 FW Admin Command Interface")
> Reviewed-by: Aleksandr Loktionov <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Piotr Kwapulinski <piotr.kwapulinski@...el.com>
> ---
Intel has a lot of code which assume that it will only run on little
endian systems... Which is probably a fair assumption, honestly.
For example:
drivers/platform/x86/intel/uncore-frequency/uncore-frequency-common.c:90 store_attr() warn: passing casted pointer '&input' to 'kstrtobool()' 32 vs 1.
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_common.c:4345 i40e_led_get_reg() warn: passing casted pointer 'reg_val' to 'i40e_read_phy_register_clause45()' 32 vs 16.
I seem them on occasion when I'm reviewing static checker warnings but
I ignore them because Intel chips are little endian.
I don't have a problem with fixing Sparse endianness warnings, but the
commit message should really say that it doesn't affect real life.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists