[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next 13/14] wireless: Use eth_<foo>_addr instead of memset

> > Other than that, I guess I'll apply this, but I really wish there was a
> > way to distinguish more easily which of these require alignment and
> > which don't.
> My guess is the eth_zero_addr and eth_broadcast functions
> are always taking aligned(2) arguments, just like all the
> is_<foo>_ether_addr functions.

Err, are you serious??? That *clearly* isn't true, and if it was then
this patch wouldn't be safe at all.

> > eth_zero_addr() doesn,t but is_zero_ether_addr() does. So does
> > ether_addr_copy(). Frankly, it's getting a bit confusing, so I can't
> > really fault anyone for using memset()/memcpy().
> I suspect more than anything else all these are historic.

I'd expect a mix here, certainly. Not all of them are really old though.


 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-03 10:21    [W:0.067 / U:0.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site