DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pawel Wodkowski <pawelx.wodkowski@intel.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] hash: fix breaking strict-aliasing rules
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:41:07 +0100
Message-ID: <550C1563.1040807@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b441d020bd7830b1c66b6f4d2aa8d776a7f0bffd.1426697208.git.e_zhumabekov@sts.kz>

On 2015-03-18 17:51, Yerden Zhumabekov wrote:
> Fix rte_hash_crc() function. Casting uint64_t pointer to uin32_t
> may trigger a compiler warning about breaking strict-aliasing rules.
> To avoid that, introduce a lookup table which is used to mask out
> a remainder of data.
>
> See issue #1, http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-March/015174.html
>
> Signed-off-by: Yerden Zhumabekov <e_zhumabekov@sts.kz>
> ---
>   lib/librte_hash/rte_hash_crc.h |   31 +++++++++++++++----------------
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_hash/rte_hash_crc.h b/lib/librte_hash/rte_hash_crc.h
> index 3dcd362..e81920f 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_hash/rte_hash_crc.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_hash/rte_hash_crc.h
> @@ -323,6 +323,16 @@ static const uint32_t crc32c_tables[8][256] = {{
>    0xE54C35A1, 0xAC704886, 0x7734CFEF, 0x3E08B2C8, 0xC451B7CC, 0x8D6DCAEB, 0x56294D82, 0x1F1530A5
>   }};
>
> +static const uint64_t odd_8byte_mask[] = {
> +	0x00FFFFFFFFFFFFFF,
> +	0x0000FFFFFFFFFFFF,
> +	0x000000FFFFFFFFFF,
> +	0x00000000FFFFFFFF,
> +	0x0000000000FFFFFF,
> +	0x000000000000FFFF,
> +	0x00000000000000FF,
> +};
> +
>   #define CRC32_UPD(crc, n) \
>   	(crc32c_tables[(n)][(crc) & 0xFF] ^ \
>   	 crc32c_tables[(n)-1][((crc) >> 8) & 0xFF])
> @@ -535,38 +545,27 @@ static inline uint32_t
>   rte_hash_crc(const void *data, uint32_t data_len, uint32_t init_val)
>   {
>   	unsigned i;
> -	uint64_t temp = 0;
> +	uint64_t temp;
>   	const uint64_t *p64 = (const uint64_t *)data;
>
>   	for (i = 0; i < data_len / 8; i++) {
>   		init_val = rte_hash_crc_8byte(*p64++, init_val);
>   	}
>
> -	switch (7 - (data_len & 0x07)) {
> +	i = 7 - (data_len & 0x07);

Great idea with lookup table!
Only one question here: why keeping this magic at all now?
If you sort odd_8byte_mask opposite direction you can do something like that

	data_len &= 0x07;
	switch (data_len & 0x07) {
	case 1:
	case 2:
	case 3:
	case 4:
		temp = odd_8byte_mask[data_len] & *p64;
		init_val = rte_hash_crc_4byte(temp, init_val);
	case 5:
	case 6:
	case 7:
		temp = odd_8byte_mask[data_len] & *p64;
		init_val = rte_hash_crc_8byte(temp, init_val);
		break;
	default:
		break;
	}
Or

	data_len &= 0x07;
	if (data_len > 0) {
		temp = odd_8byte_mask[data_len] & *p64;
		if (data_len <= 4)
			init_val = rte_hash_crc_4byte(temp, init_val);
		else
			init_val = rte_hash_crc_8byte(temp, init_val);
	}
	
Is there something obvious what I am not seeing here?

Pawel

> +	switch (i) {
>   	case 0:
> -		temp |= (uint64_t) *((const uint8_t *)p64 + 6) << 48;
> -		/* Fallthrough */
>   	case 1:
> -		temp |= (uint64_t) *((const uint8_t *)p64 + 5) << 40;
> -		/* Fallthrough */
>   	case 2:
> -		temp |= (uint64_t) *((const uint8_t *)p64 + 4) << 32;
> -		temp |= *((const uint32_t *)p64);
> +		temp = odd_8byte_mask[i] & *p64;
>   		init_val = rte_hash_crc_8byte(temp, init_val);
>   		break;
>   	case 3:
> -		init_val = rte_hash_crc_4byte(*(const uint32_t *)p64, init_val);
> -		break;
>   	case 4:
> -		temp |= *((const uint8_t *)p64 + 2) << 16;
> -		/* Fallthrough */
>   	case 5:
> -		temp |= *((const uint8_t *)p64 + 1) << 8;
> -		/* Fallthrough */
>   	case 6:
> -		temp |= *((const uint8_t *)p64);
> +		temp = odd_8byte_mask[i] & *p64;
>   		init_val = rte_hash_crc_4byte(temp, init_val);
> -		/* Fallthrough */
>   	default:
>   		break;
>   	}
>


-- 
Pawel

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-03-20 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-18 16:51 Yerden Zhumabekov
2015-03-19 16:25 ` Bruce Richardson
2015-03-19 16:31   ` Bruce Richardson
2015-03-20  3:29     ` Yerden Zhumabekov
2015-03-20 12:41 ` Pawel Wodkowski [this message]
2015-03-20 12:47 ` Pawel Wodkowski
2015-03-21  6:57   ` Жумабеков Ерден Мирзагулович
2015-03-24 13:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Yerden Zhumabekov
2015-03-26 17:47   ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2015-03-27  9:26     ` Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=550C1563.1040807@intel.com \
    --to=pawelx.wodkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git