On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 02:04 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-12-01 18:58, Charles Williams: > > On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 00:34 +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > > 2015-12-01 14:37, Stephen Hemminger: > > > > Harish Patil <harish.patil at qlogic.com> wrote: > > > > > >2015-11-03 12:26, Chas Williams: > > > > > >> --- a/drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x.c > > > > > >> +++ b/drivers/net/bnx2x/bnx2x.c > > > > > >> - tx_start_bd->vlan_or_ethertype = > > > > > >> eh->ether_type; > > > > > >> + tx_start_bd->vlan_or_ethertype > > > > > >> + = > > > > > >> rte_cpu_to_le_16(rte_be_to_cpu_16(eh->ether_type)); > > > > > > > > > > Minor question - any specific reason to use rte_be_to_cpu_16() on > > > > > ether_type alone before converting from native order to le16? > > > > > > > > ether_type is in network byte order (big endian) > > > > and hardware wants little endian. On x86 the second step is a nop. > > > > > > Doesn't it deserve a macro rte_ntole16()? > > > It may be in lib/librte_eal/common/include/generic/rte_byteorder.h. > > > > I looked I didn't see anything. This value, according to the linux > > driver, wants to be little endian regardless of the host endian. > > Yes, that's why I suggest to create some macros to do this kind of conversion. > Example: rte_ntole16 means "network to little endian 16-bit". > Do you think it would be clearer to use?
This is the only example of this kind of conversion in the source code so it would be a macro for one user. If you create rte_ntole16() you might feel obligated to create the various permutations for which there are no consumers.
