[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1349944115.2243.18.camel@joe-AO722>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 01:28:35 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Brian Haley <brian.haley@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] treewide: s/ipv4_is_<foo>()/ipv4_addr_<foo>/
On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 09:11 +0100, David Laight wrote:
> > ipv4 and ipv6 use different styles for these tests.
> >
> > ipv4_is_<foo>(__be32)
> > ipv6_addr_<foo>(struct in6_addr *)
>
> I presume there is a 'const' in there ...
>
> > Perhaps it'd be good to convert the ipv4 tests to the ipv6 style.
>
> You don't want to force an IPv4 address (which might be in a register)
> be written out to stack.
> Taking the address also has implications for the optimiser.
Of course not, I'm just talking about renaming.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists