[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140304.192309.337489223683931299.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 19:23:09 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: phoebe.buckheister@...m.fraunhofer.de
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-zigbee-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/4] ieee802154: add generic header
handling routines
From: "Phoebe Buckheister" <phoebe.buckheister@...m.fraunhofer.de>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 23:49:33 +0100
> I didn't mean the runtime cost of any conversion that might happen, I was
> thinking about how much these conversions would affect the code that uses
> these header structs. While for the u16/u32 fields this might be not much,
> it will be more for the hardware address fields since these are stored as
> the little endian encoding of u64 field you get when reading the u8[8] as
> a __be64. If I understand you correctly, these fields would also have to
> be in network byte order in the header struct, introducing copy-and-swaps
> in every upper layer that uses those addresses and making address matching
> harder since memcmp won't work anymore.
SUre it would, store the addresses in your internal data structures
as a __be64 too. That's what IPV4/IPV6 do, we store addresses and
ports in the socket in network byte order. Comparisons just work.
--
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