lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] tcp: don't use __constant_cpu_to_be32
On (03/18/19 09:32), Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
[..]
> > -#define bpf_htons(x) \
> > - (__builtin_constant_p(x) ? \
> > - __bpf_constant_htons(x) : __bpf_htons(x))
> > -#define bpf_ntohs(x) \
> > - (__builtin_constant_p(x) ? \
> > - __bpf_constant_ntohs(x) : __bpf_ntohs(x))
> > -#define bpf_htonl(x) \
> > - (__builtin_constant_p(x) ? \
> > - __bpf_constant_htonl(x) : __bpf_htonl(x))
> > -#define bpf_ntohl(x) \
> > - (__builtin_constant_p(x) ? \
> > - __bpf_constant_ntohl(x) : __bpf_ntohl(x))
> > +#define bpf_htons(x) __bpf_htons((x))
> > +#define bpf_ntohs(x) __bpf_ntohs((x))
> > +#define bpf_htonl(x) __bpf_htonl((x))
> > +#define bpf_ntohl(x) __bpf_ntohl((x))
> At this point we can probably drop __bpf_xxx as well?
> Care to resend with proper description when bpf-next opens?

OK.

-ss

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-03-19 02:30    [W:0.063 / U:2.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site