RE: [PATCH v2] byteswap: try to avoid __builtin_constant_p gcc bug

From: Levy, Amir (Jer)
Date: Wed Jun 22 2016 - 06:38:39 EST


On 2016-06-22 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 11:24:50 AM CEST Tomas Winkler wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tomas Winkler <tomasw@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > >> On Monday 02 May 2016 16:32:25 Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > >> #ifdef __HAVE_BUILTIN_BSWAP32__
> > >> -#define __swab32(x) __builtin_bswap32((__u32)(x))
> > >> +#define __swab32(x) (__u32)__builtin_bswap32((__u32)(x))
> > >> #else
> > >> #define __swab32(x) \
> > >> (__builtin_constant_p((__u32)(x)) ? \
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > > I wonder if this doesn't break switch statement that requires a
> > > constant expression, there few cases like this over the kernel.
> > >
> > > switch(val) {
> > > case cpu_to_le32(IXGBE_RXDADV_STAT_FCSTAT_FCPRSP):
> > >
> > > http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgb
> > > e/ixgbe_fcoe.c#L458
> > >
> >
> > I'm asking because sparse and checkpatch doesn't agree on that ping
> > sparse issues
> > 'error: bad constant expression'
> > When changing to __constant_cpu_to_le32 sparse is happy but
> > checkpatch.ps is complaining
> > __constant_cpu_to_le32 should be cpu_to_le32
> >
>
> That is an interesting problem, as both seem to be reasonable:
> sparse probably doesn't understand __builtin_constant_p() enough, while
> avoiding __constant_cpu_to_le32() is a good recommendation in general.
>
> How many instances of this do you see in the kernel? If ixgbe is the only one,
> I'd just move the byteswap up into the switch statement:
>
> switch (le32_to_cpu(val)) {
> case IXGBE_RXDADV_STAT_FCSTAT_FCPRSP:
>
> which may cost one or two cycles for the non-constant byteswap, but is also
> easier to read than the current code.
>
> Arnd

There are more than 20 files that have the statement: case cpu_to_...
Sparse complains about: case __builtin_bswap, not about __builtin_constant_p.

Amir