On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 01:18:21PM -0700, Joe Stringer wrote: > On 25 May 2017 at 10:42, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 04:02:15PM -0700, Joe Stringer wrote: > >> Clang 4.0 complains: > >> > >> ../tests/test-hash.c:160:16: error: taking address of packed member 'b' of > >> class or structure 'offset_ovs_u128' may result in an unaligned pointer > >> value > >> [-Werror,-Waddress-of-packed-member] > >> in0 = &in0_data.b; > >> > >> Rework the 128-bit hash test to have a separate function for setting > >> bits in the 32-bit offset u128 structure. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer <[email protected]> > > > > How about something like this, to reduce code duplication? I have not > > tested it with Clang 4.0. > > > > diff --git a/tests/test-hash.c b/tests/test-hash.c > > index d1beead36ed5..f02f0218c71f 100644 > > --- a/tests/test-hash.c > > +++ b/tests/test-hash.c > > @@ -153,14 +153,13 @@ check_hash_bytes128(void (*hash)(const void *, > > size_t, uint32_t, ovs_u128 *), > > OVS_PACKED(struct offset_ovs_u128 { > > uint32_t a; > > ovs_u128 b; > > - }) in0_data; > > - ovs_u128 *in0, in1; > > + }) in0; > > + ovs_u128 in1; > > ovs_u128 out0, out1; > > > > - in0 = &in0_data.b; > > - set_bit128(in0, i, n_bits); > > set_bit128(&in1, i, n_bits); > > - hash(in0, sizeof(ovs_u128), 0, &out0); > > + in0.b = in1; > > + hash(&in0.b, sizeof(ovs_u128), 0, &out0); > > hash(&in1, sizeof(ovs_u128), 0, &out1); > > if (!ovs_u128_equals(out0, out1)) { > > printf("%s hash not the same for non-64 aligned data " > > Thanks, this looks like a much better approach and it satisfies clang > 4.0. Will you propose this formally or shall I? The 256B version needs > a slight variation on this as well.
I was hoping that you would propose it formally. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
