From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C3DAA0C40; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 20:16:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEDD84067C; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 20:16:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-ot1-f41.google.com (mail-ot1-f41.google.com [209.85.210.41]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C8534014F for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 20:16:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-ot1-f41.google.com with SMTP id 36-20020a9d0ba70000b02902e0a0a8fe36so3991465oth.8 for ; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 11:16:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=h0UGwErhBF45I41GXTkdxB/M51g0QlE27VaNCYKG4Ek=; b=gjymA6jeXlIuNbATwMp2BkrH336qhDkGyCJG3ihMnrFVI5RyVor42JFTyXHR2dryvO 91ynMJ+IAjJA1EXCxFYdk5KIFBxHfsYOuldkjM6L7kzI8YV2i9hfgJwWKqoXwtxiceAh kj9laiWFbLinA6LzGqXb+iGAtLrjPPrkHm/EQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=h0UGwErhBF45I41GXTkdxB/M51g0QlE27VaNCYKG4Ek=; b=DUF7WrX/NIxLVQ9XmzGfoK8OH30Q0msfR6cHVpGKvoYFNenr8Sx2IsCaJzJ6eGRdez zabGd5QagzBSEDD1DLR90T98VceY8lKv7aYWsYhOK3xTwoIXLsPfqQckemMUonnvJvMo IHaMrKrrtZqWF/CMWCFCSNlnMDmzcxuHliJDC4QnaB1/nG50xmoBA7EdvcqJ31X6sU9l PZkBPR4sjg6e/Ovb5LfRC8X1SyotPAY3OXfxOA3lJlkC/dpRZfBzZAEIMXRFHdODZIB6 KkUEmwwacJqF2XyHMvsWgBmhvMdkKd2f8aDIM2xM8uBRGeVB7ZszzLXZuLhYbYbdPAGb xzIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530bXW97MACfLjDzFSoYgWQqNlLYGXmCwHVn/bqByP1zm5W2ZIlf Ifz4S5/n8TL8tiXHKnJvaoCoO4todi+/LTdhaL4oXQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw6LTFFTg7Vy9rzHNN5iljnuK23Z6/rMLc/BrWeZND3+qD9DfC5Jfe9UXMVIfel6DV9UuJyCdf/69Cm/2oVo8w= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4b98:: with SMTP id k24mr4259169otf.359.1623435383484; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 11:16:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210610143604.48278bcc@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: From: Owen Hilyard Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 14:15:47 -0400 Message-ID: To: Aaron Conole Cc: Stephen Hemminger , David Marchand , dev , Rasesh Mody , Shahed Shaikh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Define statement with UB prevents compilation using UBSAN X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Seeing the discussion so far, do we want to change the single definition to be (0b1u << 31) so it works, or should we make this change in a wider scope (file, directory, project-wide). If we do make the change in a wider scope, should we only change instances where there is UB (1 << 31) or should we change all of the bitflags and similar constructs to uint32_t? If we change a lot, it may require special testing since I don't think every driver is tested on a regular basis, and making a change like this in a wide-reaching fashion has the potential to break a lot of things. On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:34 AM Aaron Conole wrote: > Stephen Hemminger writes: > > > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 16:51:37 -0400 > > Owen Hilyard wrote: > > > >> Working backward to the define > >> statement, AEU_INPUTS_ATTN_BITS_MCP_LATCHED_SCPAD_PARITY is defined as > >> > >> #define AEU_INPUTS_ATTN_BITS_MCP_LATCHED_SCPAD_PARITY (0x1 << 31) > > > > Why not (1u << 31)? > > +1 > > CC'd the QLogic maintainers as well. > >