[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070128.212851.31444923.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:28:51 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc: baruch@...en.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Seperate DSACK from SACK fast path
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:06:07 +1100
> Baruch Even <baruch@...en.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Since the SACK receive cache doesn't need the data to be in host
> >> > order we also remove the ntohl in the checking loop.
> >> ...
> >> > - for (i = 0; i< num_sacks; i++) {
> >> > - __u32 start_seq = ntohl(sp[i].start_seq);
> >> > - __u32 end_seq = ntohl(sp[i].end_seq);
> >> > + for (i = 0; i < num_sacks; i++) {
> >> > + __u32 start_seq = sp[i].start_seq;
> >> > + __u32 end_seq = sp[i].end_seq;
> >
> > Yes. The only comparison we do with recv_sack_cache entries is != and
> > that works for net-endian just fine.
>
> In that case you need to use __be32 before Al Viro starts coming after
> you :)
Good catch, Baruch please fix this up :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists