From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39AD04A65 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2016 14:34:31 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Dec 2016 05:34:31 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,310,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="37544838" Received: from bricha3-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.64]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 06 Dec 2016 05:34:28 -0800 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 06 Dec 2016 13:34:27 +0000 Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 13:34:27 +0000 From: Bruce Richardson To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio?= Laranjeiro , "dev@dpdk.org" , Olivier Matz , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , Adrien Mazarguil Message-ID: <20161206133427.GB15416@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E3F68@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20161205120603.GL21794@autoinstall.dev.6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E4632@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20161206115502.GA12224@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E46DC@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E46DC@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Organization: Intel Research and =?iso-8859-1?Q?De=ACvel?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?opment?= Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net: introduce big and little endian types X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 13:34:32 -0000 On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 12:41:00PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richardson, Bruce > > Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 11:55 AM > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin > > Cc: Nélio Laranjeiro ; dev@dpdk.org; Olivier Matz ; Lu, Wenzhuo > > ; Adrien Mazarguil > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net: introduce big and little endian types > > > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:23:42AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > Hi Neilo, > > > > > > > > > Hi Neilo, > > > > > > > > > > > > This commit introduces new rte_{le,be}{16,32,64}_t types and updates > > > > > > rte_{le,be,cpu}_to_{le,be,cpu}_*() and network header structures > > > > > > accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > Specific big/little endian types avoid uncertainty and conversion mistakes. > > > > > > > > > > > > No ABI change since these are simply typedefs to the original types. > > > > > > > > > > It seems like quite a lot of changes... > > > > > Could you probably explain what will be the benefit in return? > > > > > Konstantin > > > > > > > > Hi Konstantin, > > > > > > > > The benefit is to provide documented byte ordering for data types > > > > software is manipulating to determine when network to CPU (or CPU to > > > > network) conversion must be performed. > > > > > > Ok, but is it really worth it? > > > User can still make a mistake and forget to call ntoh()/hton() at some particular place. > > > From other side most people do know that network protocols headers are usually in BE format. > > > I would understand the effort, if we'll have some sort of tool that would do some sort of static code analysis > > > based on these special types or so. > > > Again, does it mean that we should go and change uint32_t to rte_le_32 inside all Intel PMDs > > > (and might be in some others too) to be consistent? > > > Konstantin > > > > > > > I actually quite like this patch as I think it will help make things > > clear when the user is possibly doing something wrong. I don't think we > > need to globally change all PMDs to use the types, though. > > Ok, so where do you believe we should draw a line? > Why let say inside lib/librte_net people should use these typedefs, but > inside drivers/net/ixgbe they don't? Because those are not public APIs. It would be great if driver writers used the typedefs, but I don't think it should be mandatory. > > > > > One thing I'm wondering though, is if we might want to take this > > further. For little endian environments, we could define the big endian > > types as structs using typedefs, and similarly the le types on be > > platforms, so that assigning from the non-native type to the native one > > without a transformation function would cause a compiler error. > > Not sure I understand you here. > Could you possibly provide some example? > typedef struct { short val; } rte_be16_t; That way if you try to assign a value of type rte_be16_t to a uint16_t variable you'll get a compiler error, unless you use an appropriate conversion function. In short, it changes things from not just looking wrong - which is the main purpose of Neilo's patchset - to actually making it incorrect from the compiler's point of view too. /Bruce