[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: fix shifts to operate on 64 bit integers
Gaëtan Rivet
gaetan.rivet at 6wind.com
Mon Jul 31 18:17:54 CEST 2017
Hi Harry,
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 04:58:27PM +0100, Harry van Haaren wrote:
> This commit fixes shifts to an integer (1 << shift) which
> is assumed to be a 32-bit integer. In this case, the shift is
> variable and expected to be valid for 64-bit integers. Given that
> the expectation to work with 64 bits exists, we must ensure that
> the (1 << shift) one in that formula is actually a uin64_t.
>
> Simply defining a const uint64_t and using it ensures the compiler
> is aware of the intention. The issue would only manifest if there
> were greater than 31 services registered.
>
> Fixes: 21698354c832 ("service: introduce service cores concept")
>
> Signed-off-by: Harry van Haaren <harry.van.haaren at intel.com>
> ---
> lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
> index e82b9ad..8c1cffa 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
> @@ -285,8 +285,9 @@ rte_service_unregister(struct rte_service_spec *spec)
>
> s->internal_flags &= ~(SERVICE_F_REGISTERED);
>
> + const uint64_t one = 1;
> for (i = 0; i < RTE_MAX_LCORE; i++)
> - lcore_states[i].service_mask &= ~(1 << service_id);
> + lcore_states[i].service_mask &= ~(one << service_id);
Why not use UINT64_C(1)?
>
> memset(&rte_services[service_id], 0,
> sizeof(struct rte_service_spec_impl));
> @@ -319,6 +320,7 @@ rte_service_runner_func(void *arg)
> {
> RTE_SET_USED(arg);
> uint32_t i;
> + const uint64_t one = 1;
> const int lcore = rte_lcore_id();
> struct core_state *cs = &lcore_states[lcore];
>
> @@ -327,7 +329,7 @@ rte_service_runner_func(void *arg)
> for (i = 0; i < rte_service_count; i++) {
> struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[i];
> if (s->runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
> - !(service_mask & (1 << i)))
> + !(service_mask & (one << i)))
> continue;
>
> /* check do we need cmpset, if MT safe or <= 1 core
> @@ -448,6 +450,7 @@ service_update(struct rte_service_spec *service, uint32_t lcore,
> {
> uint32_t i;
> int32_t sid = -1;
> + const uint64_t one = 1;
>
> for (i = 0; i < RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX; i++) {
> if ((struct rte_service_spec *)&rte_services[i] == service &&
> @@ -465,16 +468,16 @@ service_update(struct rte_service_spec *service, uint32_t lcore,
>
> if (set) {
> if (*set) {
> - lcore_states[lcore].service_mask |= (1 << sid);
> + lcore_states[lcore].service_mask |= (one << sid);
> rte_services[sid].num_mapped_cores++;
> } else {
> - lcore_states[lcore].service_mask &= ~(1 << sid);
> + lcore_states[lcore].service_mask &= ~(one << sid);
> rte_services[sid].num_mapped_cores--;
> }
> }
>
> if (enabled)
> - *enabled = (lcore_states[lcore].service_mask & (1 << sid));
> + *enabled = (lcore_states[lcore].service_mask & (one << sid));
>
> rte_smp_wmb();
>
> @@ -599,6 +602,7 @@ rte_service_lcore_start(uint32_t lcore)
> int32_t
> rte_service_lcore_stop(uint32_t lcore)
> {
> + const uint64_t one = 1;
> if (lcore >= RTE_MAX_LCORE)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> @@ -607,7 +611,7 @@ rte_service_lcore_stop(uint32_t lcore)
>
> uint32_t i;
> for (i = 0; i < RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX; i++) {
> - int32_t enabled = lcore_states[i].service_mask & (1 << i);
> + int32_t enabled = lcore_states[i].service_mask & (one << i);
> int32_t service_running = rte_services[i].runstate !=
> RUNSTATE_STOPPED;
> int32_t only_core = rte_services[i].num_mapped_cores == 1;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
--
Gaëtan Rivet
6WIND
More information about the dev
mailing list