Hi Bruce, Yes, the patch http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/3132/ should be abandoned.
Thanks, Shi xuelin > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson at intel.com] > Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 19:14 > To: Shi Xuelin-B29237 > Cc: thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com; dev at dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] librte_lpm: define tbl entry reversely for big > endian > > On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 02:12:12AM +0000, Xuelin Shi wrote: > > Hi Bruce, > > > > Yes, it needs to swap the fields. The bit field is first identified as > the uint8_t and then packed. > > > > Thanks, > > Shi xuelin > > > Am I right in thinking that this patch set supercedes that for > "lpm: use field access instead of type conversion" > http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/3132/ ? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson at intel.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 18:48 > > > To: Shi Xuelin-B29237 > > > Cc: thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com; dev at dpdk.org > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] librte_lpm: define tbl entry reversely for big > > > endian > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 02:34:12PM +0800, xuelin.shi at freescale.com > wrote: > > > > From: Xuelin Shi <xuelin.shi at freescale.com> > > > > > > > > This module uses type conversion between struct and int. > > > > Also truncation and comparison is used with this int. > > > > It is not safe for different endian arch. > > > > > > > > Add ifdef for big endian struct to fix this issue. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xuelin Shi <xuelin.shi at freescale.com> > > > > --- > > > > lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > > > > index > > > > 1af150c..08a2859 100644 > > > > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h > > > > @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ extern "C" { > > > > /** Bitmask used to indicate successful lookup */ > > > > #define RTE_LPM_LOOKUP_SUCCESS 0x0100 > > > > > > > > +#if RTE_BYTE_ORDER == RTE_LITTLE_ENDIAN > > > > /** @internal Tbl24 entry structure. */ struct > rte_lpm_tbl24_entry { > > > > /* Stores Next hop or group index (i.e. gindex)into tbl8. */ > @@ > > > > -117,6 +118,24 @@ struct rte_lpm_tbl8_entry { > > > > uint8_t valid_group :1; /**< Group validation flag. */ > > > > uint8_t depth :6; /**< Rule depth. */ > > > > }; > > > > +#else > > > > +struct rte_lpm_tbl24_entry { > > > > + uint8_t depth :6; > > > > + uint8_t ext_entry :1; > > > > + uint8_t valid :1; > > > > > > Since endianness only refers to the order of bytes within a word, do > > > the bitfields within the uint8_t really need to be swapped around too? > > > > > > /Bruce > > > > > > > > > + union { > > > > + uint8_t tbl8_gindex; > > > > + uint8_t next_hop; > > > > + }; > > > > +}; > > > > + > > > > +struct rte_lpm_tbl8_entry { > > > > + uint8_t depth :6; > > > > + uint8_t valid_group :1; > > > > + uint8_t valid :1; > > > > + uint8_t next_hop; > > > > +}; > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > /** @internal Rule structure. */ > > > > struct rte_lpm_rule { > > > > -- > > > > 1.9.1 > > > >
