lkml.org 
[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
From
Date
On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 10:00 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 00:52 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > > > 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???
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > That *clearly* isn't true, and if it was then
> > > this patch wouldn't be safe at all.
> >
> > And why is that?
> >
> > Until patch 1 of this series, eth_zero_addr and
> > eth_broadcast_addr was just an inline for a memset.
> >
> > Even after patch 1, it's effectively still memset.
>
> Exactly. It therefore *doesn't* require an aligned(2) argument, unlike
> what you stated above, hence my question if you're serious (and perhaps
> looking at some other code that I don't have).

Nope, you simply misunderstood what I did write.

What I said was that the arguments were likely
already aligned(2), not that the alignment was
a requirement.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-03 11:41    [W:0.058 / U:0.952 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site