On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 02:12:59PM +0800, xuelin.shi at freescale.com wrote: > From: Xuelin Shi <xuelin.shi at freescale.com> > > struct tbl_entry{ > uint8_t next_hop; > uint8_t valid :1; > uint8_t valid_group :1; > uint8_t depth :6 > } > uint16_t tbl = (uint16_t)tbl_entry; > next_hop = (uint8_t)tbl; > > next_hop cannot get the correct value of the field > if the cpu arch is BIG_ENDIAN. > > change it to field access. > > Signed-off-by: Xuelin Shi <xuelin.shi at freescale.com> > --- > lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > index 586300b..1af150c 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > @@ -273,6 +273,7 @@ rte_lpm_lookup(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t > *next_hop) > { > unsigned tbl24_index = (ip >> 8); > uint16_t tbl_entry; > + struct rte_lpm_tbl8_entry *entry; > > /* DEBUG: Check user input arguments. */ > RTE_LPM_RETURN_IF_TRUE(((lpm == NULL) || (next_hop == NULL)), -EINVAL); > @@ -290,8 +291,10 @@ rte_lpm_lookup(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t > *next_hop) > tbl_entry = *(const uint16_t *)&lpm->tbl8[tbl8_index]; > } > > - *next_hop = (uint8_t)tbl_entry; > - return (tbl_entry & RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS) ? 0 : -ENOENT; > + entry = (struct rte_lpm_tbl8_entry *)&tbl_entry; > + *next_hop = entry->next_hop; > + > + return (entry->valid) ? 0 : -ENOENT; > } > > /** > -- > 1.9.1 > I've run a quick test using "lpm_autotest" inside the test app, and on my (Intel) platform, this patch has a small (but none-the-less significant) performance regression. How about the below as an alternative fix?
/Bruce diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h index 586300b..de6f1cb 100644 --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ #include <stdint.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <rte_branch_prediction.h> +#include <rte_byteorder.h> #include <rte_memory.h> #include <rte_common.h> #include <rte_common_vect.h> @@ -287,7 +288,8 @@ rte_lpm_lookup(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip, uint8_t *next_hop) unsigned tbl8_index = (uint8_t)ip + ((uint8_t)tbl_entry * RTE_LPM_TBL8_GROUP_NUM_ENTRIES); - tbl_entry = *(const uint16_t *)&lpm->tbl8[tbl8_index]; + tbl_entry = rte_cpu_to_le_16( + *(const uint16_t *)&lpm->tbl8[tbl8_index]); } *next_hop = (uint8_t)tbl_entry;