x86: use the new byteorder headers

Signed-off-by Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>

---
The prerequisite patches have landed in Linus' tree now.

 include/asm-x86/byteorder.h |   69 +++++++++++++++++--------------------------
 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)

include/asm-x86/byteorder.h +26 -35

index e02ae2d..7187b3a 100644
@@ -4,26 +4,33 @@
 #include <asm/types.h>
 #include <linux/compiler.h>
 
-#ifdef __GNUC__
+#define __LITTLE_ENDIAN
 
-#ifdef __i386__
-
-static inline __attribute_const__ __u32 ___arch__swab32(__u32 x)
+static inline __attribute_const__ __u32 __arch_swab32(__u32 val)
 {
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_BSWAP
-	asm("bswap %0" : "=r" (x) : "0" (x));
-#else
+#ifdef __i386__
+# ifdef CONFIG_X86_BSWAP
+	asm("bswap %0" : "=r" (val) : "0" (val));
+# else
 	asm("xchgb %b0,%h0\n\t"	/* swap lower bytes	*/
 	    "rorl $16,%0\n\t"	/* swap words		*/
 	    "xchgb %b0,%h0"	/* swap higher bytes	*/
-	    : "=q" (x)
-	    : "0" (x));
+	    : "=q" (val)
+	    : "0" (val));
+# endif
+
+#else /* __i386__ */
+	asm("bswapl %0"
+	    : "=r" (val)
+	    : "0" (val));
 #endif
-	return x;
+	return val;
 }
+#define __arch_swab32 __arch_swab32
 
-static inline __attribute_const__ __u64 ___arch__swab64(__u64 val)
+static inline __attribute_const__ __u64 __arch_swab64(__u64 val)
 {
+#ifdef __i386__
 	union {
 		struct {
 			__u32 a;

@@ -32,50 +39,28 @@ static inline __attribute_const__ __u64 ___arch__swab64(__u64 val)
 		__u64 u;
 	} v;
 	v.u = val;
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_BSWAP
+# ifdef CONFIG_X86_BSWAP
 	asm("bswapl %0 ; bswapl %1 ; xchgl %0,%1"
 	    : "=r" (v.s.a), "=r" (v.s.b)
 	    : "0" (v.s.a), "1" (v.s.b));
-#else
+# else
 	v.s.a = ___arch__swab32(v.s.a);
 	v.s.b = ___arch__swab32(v.s.b);
 	asm("xchgl %0,%1"
 	    : "=r" (v.s.a), "=r" (v.s.b)
 	    : "0" (v.s.a), "1" (v.s.b));
-#endif
+# endif
 	return v.u;
-}
 
 #else /* __i386__ */
-
-static inline __attribute_const__ __u64 ___arch__swab64(__u64 x)
-{
 	asm("bswapq %0"
-	    : "=r" (x)
-	    : "0" (x));
-	return x;
-}
-
-static inline __attribute_const__ __u32 ___arch__swab32(__u32 x)
-{
-	asm("bswapl %0"
-	    : "=r" (x)
-	    : "0" (x));
-	return x;
-}
-
+	    : "=r" (val)
+	    : "0" (val));
+	return val;
 #endif
+}
+#define __arch_swab64 __arch_swab64
 
-/* Do not define swab16.  Gcc is smart enough to recognize "C" version and
-   convert it into rotation or exhange.  */
-
-#define __arch__swab64(x) ___arch__swab64(x)

___generally means I am an internal implementation detail, don't use me.

Signed-off-by Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>

---
Sorry for breaking the build Andrew, my testing has been with all the __constant versions in-tree removed.

 net/tipc/subscr.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

net/tipc/subscr.c +0 -0

index 0326d30..f5da05d 100644

Quoted 17 lines · On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:05:47 -0700 Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>…

___generally means I am an internal implementation detail, don't use me.

Signed-off-by Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>

---
Sorry for breaking the build Andrew, my testing has been with all the __constant versions in-tree removed.

 net/tipc/subscr.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

net/tipc/subscr.c +0 -0

index 0326d30..f5da05d 100644
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static struct top_srv topsrv = { 0 };
 

net/tipc/subscr.c static struct top_srv topsrv = { 0 }; · line 89

Quoted 5 lines

net/tipc/subscr.c +1 -1

 static u32 htohl(u32 in, int swap)
 {
-	return swap ? (u32)___constant_swab32(in) : in;
+	return swap ? (u32)swab32(in) : in;
 }

yes, that's what I did too, only I dropped the
seems-to-me-to-be-unneeded (u32) cast.

Quoted 18 lines

___generally means I am an internal implementation detail, don't use me.

Signed-off-by Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>

---
Sorry for breaking the build Andrew, my testing has been with all the __constant versions in-tree removed.

 net/tipc/subscr.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

net/tipc/subscr.c +0 -0

index 0326d30..f5da05d 100644
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static struct top_srv topsrv = { 0 };
 

net/tipc/subscr.c static struct top_srv topsrv = { 0 }; · line 89

Quoted 5 lines

net/tipc/subscr.c +1 -1

 static u32 htohl(u32 in, int swap)
 {
-	return swap ? (u32)___constant_swab32(in) : in;
+	return swap ? (u32)swab32(in) : in;
 }

yes, that's what I did too, only I dropped the
seems-to-me-to-be-unneeded (u32) cast.

I'll drop them all. Do you have a cross-compiler suite there?

From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:56:12 -0700

Quoted 1 line

I'll drop them all. Do you have a cross-compiler suite there?

I think Harvey needs a mentor which can help him learn how to properly build validate his patches before he submits them, and how to not mix things up by, for example, validating the build with patches applied that won't be submitted etc.

Every time I integrate these byteorder patches directly for networking or sparc, it tends to be a build regression nightmare.

I think Andrew has hit 3 already with this patch series, quite an accomplishment. :-/

I'll drop them all.

Quoted 1 line · On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:56:12 -0700 Andrew Morton <[email protected]>…

I'll drop them all.

btw, I had to rework several of these patches because everyone is moving include/asm-arch/* into arch/include/asm/. Patches against linux-next would be preferred please.

Quoted 8 lines · Andrew Morton

Quoted 1 line · On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:56:12 -0700 Andrew Morton <[email protected]>…

I'll drop them all.

btw, I had to rework several of these patches because everyone is moving include/asm-arch/* into arch/include/asm/. Patches against linux-next would be preferred please.

Which arches? These were all against linux-next20080811.