Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen: make include/xen/unaligned.h usable on all architectures

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 05.12.2023 11:07, Juergen Gross wrote:
> @@ -15,67 +7,126 @@
>  #include <asm/byteorder.h>
>  #endif
>  
> -#define get_unaligned(p) (*(p))
> -#define put_unaligned(val, p) (*(p) = (val))
> +/*
> + * This is the most generic implementation of unaligned accesses
> + * and should work almost anywhere.
> + */
> +
> +#define __get_unaligned_t(type, ptr) ({                                      
>         \
> +     const struct { type x; } __packed *__pptr = (typeof(__pptr))(ptr);      
> \
> +     __pptr->x;                                                              
> \
> +})
> +
> +#define __put_unaligned_t(type, val, ptr) do {                               
>         \
> +     struct { type x; } __packed *__pptr = (typeof(__pptr))(ptr);            
> \
> +     __pptr->x = (val);                                                      
> \
> +} while (0)

Please can we avoid gaining new (even double) leading underscore symbols,
especially when they're in helper (i.e. not intended to be used directly)
constructs? No reason to introduce further issues wrt Misra adoption.

> +#define get_unaligned(ptr)   __get_unaligned_t(typeof(*(ptr)), (ptr))
> +#define put_unaligned(val, ptr) __put_unaligned_t(typeof(*(ptr)), (val), 
> (ptr))

May I ask to omit excess parentheses where possible?

> +static inline u16 get_unaligned_le16(const void *p)
> +{
> +     return le16_to_cpu(__get_unaligned_t(__le16, p));
> +}
> +
> +static inline u32 get_unaligned_le32(const void *p)
> +{
> +     return le32_to_cpu(__get_unaligned_t(__le32, p));
> +}
> +
> +static inline u64 get_unaligned_le64(const void *p)
> +{
> +     return le64_to_cpu(__get_unaligned_t(__le64, p));
> +}
> +
> +static inline void put_unaligned_le16(u16 val, void *p)
> +{
> +     __put_unaligned_t(__le16, cpu_to_le16(val), p);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void put_unaligned_le32(u32 val, void *p)
> +{
> +     __put_unaligned_t(__le32, cpu_to_le32(val), p);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void put_unaligned_le64(u64 val, void *p)
> +{
> +     __put_unaligned_t(__le64, cpu_to_le64(val), p);
> +}
> +
> +static inline u16 get_unaligned_be16(const void *p)
> +{
> +     return be16_to_cpu(__get_unaligned_t(__be16, p));
> +}
> +
> +static inline u32 get_unaligned_be32(const void *p)
> +{
> +     return be32_to_cpu(__get_unaligned_t(__be32, p));
> +}
>  
> -static inline uint16_t get_unaligned_be16(const void *p)
> +static inline u64 get_unaligned_be64(const void *p)
>  {
> -     return be16_to_cpup(p);
> +     return be64_to_cpu(__get_unaligned_t(__be64, p));
>  }
>  
> -static inline void put_unaligned_be16(uint16_t val, void *p)
> +static inline void put_unaligned_be16(u16 val, void *p)
>  {
> -     *(__force __be16*)p = cpu_to_be16(val);
> +     __put_unaligned_t(__be16, cpu_to_be16(val), p);
>  }
>  
> -static inline uint32_t get_unaligned_be32(const void *p)
> +static inline void put_unaligned_be32(u32 val, void *p)
>  {
> -     return be32_to_cpup(p);
> +     __put_unaligned_t(__be32, cpu_to_be32(val), p);
>  }
>  
> -static inline void put_unaligned_be32(uint32_t val, void *p)
> +static inline void put_unaligned_be64(u64 val, void *p)
>  {
> -     *(__force __be32*)p = cpu_to_be32(val);
> +     __put_unaligned_t(__be64, cpu_to_be64(val), p);
>  }
>  
> -static inline uint64_t get_unaligned_be64(const void *p)
> +static inline u32 __get_unaligned_be24(const u8 *p)

Here and below - do you foresee use of these 24-bit helpers? They weren't
there before, and the description also doesn't justify their introduction.

Jan