Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752547AbaBXKWu (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 05:22:50 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:62541 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751685AbaBXKWt (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2014 05:22:49 -0500 Message-ID: <530B1D60.8010602@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 11:22:24 +0100 From: Daniel Borkmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Beulich CC: davem@davemloft.net, mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, ffusco@redhat.com, tgraf@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/hash: swap parameters of crc32_u32() References: <53073986020000780011E2E1@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <5308938A.8070506@redhat.com> <530B0AF2020000780011E97B@nat28.tlf.novell.com> In-Reply-To: <530B0AF2020000780011E97B@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/24/2014 09:03 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 22.02.14 at 13:09, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> On 02/21/2014 11:33 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> ... to match its two callers (i.e. the alternative would have been to >>> swap the arguments at the call sites). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >>> Cc: Francesco Fusco >>> Cc: Daniel Borkmann >>> Cc: Thomas Graf >>> Cc: David S. Miller >>> --- >>> arch/x86/lib/hash.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> --- 3.14-rc3-x86-hash-crc32.orig/arch/x86/lib/hash.c >>> +++ 3.14-rc3-x86-hash-crc32/arch/x86/lib/hash.c >>> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ >>> #include >>> #include >>> >>> -static inline u32 crc32_u32(u32 crc, u32 val) >>> +static inline u32 crc32_u32(u32 val, u32 crc) >>> { >>> #ifdef CONFIG_AS_CRC32 >>> asm ("crc32l %1,%0\n" : "+r" (crc) : "rm" (val)); >> >> Can you elaborate? >> >> Sorry, I need to ask here (even if it's a stupid question ;)) if this >> change is safe to do; are referring to a cleanup or fixing a concrete >> bug? The code is a modified version of the DPDK hash which you can find >> in [1]. Arguments of the caller are in the correct order, afaik. >> >> [1] http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/tree/lib/librte_hash/rte_hash_crc.h > > Yes, that file appears to be correct: > > rte_hash_crc_4byte(uint32_t data, uint32_t init_val) > > as opposed to > > static inline u32 crc32_u32(u32 crc, u32 val) > > (quite obviously data <-> val and crc <-> init_val, supported > by the second argument in each caller being named "seed"). If you want a more descriptive name, feel free to rename these vars, but check it yourself, it's not a bug as you claim; results are the same: /* gcc -march=corei7 -Wall -O2 intel_crc.c -lgsl * ./a.out * Result: good:10000 bad:0 */ #include #include #include #include #include #include /* Kernel code */ static inline uint32_t crc32_u32(uint32_t crc, uint32_t val) { asm ("crc32l %1,%0\n" : "+r" (crc) : "rm" (val)); return crc; } static uint32_t intel_crc4_2_hash(const void *data, uint32_t len, uint32_t seed) { const uint32_t *p32 = (const uint32_t *) data; uint32_t i; for (i = 0; i < len / 4; i++) seed = crc32_u32(*p32++, seed); return seed; } /* DPDK code */ static inline uint32_t rte_hash_crc_4byte(uint32_t data, uint32_t init_val) { return _mm_crc32_u32(data, init_val); } static inline uint32_t rte_hash_crc(const void *data, uint32_t data_len, uint32_t init_val) { const uint32_t *p32 = (const uint32_t *) data; unsigned i; for (i = 0; i < data_len / 4; i++) init_val = rte_hash_crc_4byte(*p32++, init_val); return init_val; } /* Test case */ static void fill_foo(gsl_rng *rng, void *foo, size_t len) { uint32_t *foo_32 = foo; int i; for (i = 0; i < len; i += sizeof(uint32_t)) foo_32[i] = gsl_rng_get(rng); } int main(void) { int i, good = 0, bad = 0; gsl_rng *rng; srand(time(NULL)); gsl_rng_default_seed = rand(); rng = gsl_rng_alloc(gsl_rng_taus113); if (rng == NULL) return -1; for (i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { char foo[sizeof(uint32_t) * 128]; uint32_t val1, val2, seed = gsl_rng_get(rng); fill_foo(rng, foo, sizeof(foo)); val1 = rte_hash_crc(foo, sizeof(foo), seed); val2 = intel_crc4_2_hash(foo, sizeof(foo), seed); if (val1 != val2) bad++; else good++; } gsl_rng_free(rng); printf("Result: good:%d bad:%d\n", good, bad); return 0; } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/