On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 01:30:56PM +0100, Jens Wiklander wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:44 AM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > [...] > > > > > +static int ffa_partition_probe(const char *uuid_str, > > > > > + struct ffa_partition_info *buffer) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + int count; > > > > > + uuid_t uuid; > > > > > + u32 uuid0_4[4] = { 0 }; > > > > > + > > > > > + if (uuid_parse(uuid_str, &uuid)) { > > > > > + pr_err("invalid uuid (%s)\n", uuid_str); > > > > > + return -ENODEV; > > > > > + } > > > > > + > > > > > + export_uuid((u8 *)uuid0_4, &uuid); > > > > > + count = __ffa_partition_info_get(uuid0_4[0], uuid0_4[1], uuid0_4[2], > > > > > + uuid0_4[3], &buffer); > > > Wrong byte order? > > > According to section 5.3 of the SMCCC, UUIDs are returned as a single > > > 128-bit value using the SMC32 calling convention. This value is mapped > > > to argument registers x0-x3 on AArch64 (resp. r0-r3 on AArch32). x0 > > > for example shall hold bytes 0 to 3, with byte 0 in the low-order > > > bits. > > > > > > > I need to spend some time to understand the concern here. Initially I agreed > > with your analysis and then a quick review make be realise it is all OK. > > I need to check if my understanding is correct again. I thought I will > > take example and check here itself. > > > > UUID: "fd02c9da-306c-48c7-a49c-bbd827ae86ee" IIUC this maps to (as per RFC4122). fd02c9da = time_low (bytes 0-3) 306c48c7 = time_mid & time_hi_and_version (bytes 4-7) a49cbbd8 = clock_seq_hi_and_reserved, clock_seq_low and bytes/octets 0-1 of node (bytes 8-11) 27ae86ee = bytes 2-5 of node (bytes 12-15) SMCCC says: w0 : bytes 0-3 with byte 0 in the lower order bits. w1 : bytes 4-7 with byte 4 in the lower order bits. w2 : bytes 8-11 with byte 8 in the lower order bits. w3 : bytes 12-15 with byte 12 in the lower order bits. This should amount to: w0 = dac902fd w1 = c7486c30 w2 = d8bb9ca4 w3 = ee86ae27 So, even though RFC4122 uses big-endian i.e network byte order. The UUID is encoded as little-endian as per the SMCCC. What do you reckon? cheers, Achin > > > > UUID[0] UUID[1] UUID[2] UUID[3] (referring uuid0_4 above) > > dac902fd c7486c30 d8bb9ca4 ee86ae27 > > > > It seems correct as per SMCCC convention to me, or am I missing something > > obvious ? > > In this example I'd expect the first register to hold 0xfd02c9da > regardless of the byte order of the machine. If there is a different > byte order in the receiver it will still be received as 0xfd02c9da. > That's how I've understood the specification. > > Cheers, > Jens