Re: [PATCH 3/3] ewah: support platforms that require aligned reads
From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:59:44
Jeff King wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
--- a/ewah/ewah_io.c +++ b/ewah/ewah_io.c@@ -112,23 +112,38 @@ int ewah_serialize(struct ewah_bitmap *self, int fd)
[...]
+#if __BYTE_ORDER != __BIG_ENDIAN
Is this portable? On a platform without __BYTE_ORDER or __BIG_ENDIAN defined, it is interpreted as #if 0 != 0 which means that such platforms are assumed to be big endian. Does Mingw define __BYTE_ORDER, for example?
+ {
+ size_t i;
+ for (i = 0; i < self->buffer_size; ++i)
+ self->buffer[i] = ntohll(self->buffer[i]);
+ }
+#endif
It's tempting to guard with something like
if (ntohl(1) != 1) {
...
}
The optimizer can tell if this is true or false at compile time, so
it shouldn't slow anything down.
With that change,
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <redacted>
Thanks for the quick fix.
diff --git i/ewah/ewah_io.c w/ewah/ewah_io.c
index 4a7fae6..5a527a4 100644
--- i/ewah/ewah_io.c
+++ w/ewah/ewah_io.c@@ -135,13 +135,11 @@ int ewah_read_mmap(struct ewah_bitmap *self, void *map, size_t len) memcpy(self->buffer, ptr, self->buffer_size * sizeof(uint64_t)); ptr += self->buffer_size * sizeof(uint64_t); -#if __BYTE_ORDER != __BIG_ENDIAN - { + if (ntohl(1) != 1) { size_t i; for (i = 0; i < self->buffer_size; ++i) self->buffer[i] = ntohll(self->buffer[i]); } -#endif self->rlw = self->buffer + get_be32(ptr);