4 messages, 2 authors, 2011-05-12 · open the first message on its own page
From: Franco Fichtner <hidden>
Date: 2011-05-12 08:30:44
Hi all, I found this while skimming through recent net-next patches. I'm not quite sure if the padding in this struct is correct now. Franco
From: Michał Mirosław <hidden>
Date: 2011-05-12 08:55:56
2011/5/12 Franco Fichtner [off-list ref]:
I found this while skimming through recent net-next patches. I'm not quite sure if the padding in this struct is correct now.
Nice catch. But please send the patch inline instead of as an attachment. Best Regards, Michał Mirosław
From: Franco Fichtner <hidden>
Date: 2011-05-12 09:13:48
On 12/05/11 10:55, Michał Mirosław wrote:
2011/5/12 Franco Fichtner [off-list ref]:quoted
I found this while skimming through recent net-next patches. I'm not quite sure if the padding in this struct is correct now.Nice catch. But please send the patch inline instead of as an attachment.
Thanks, but I have a short question. Are the empty strings in
this struct really needed?
/* NETIF_F_TSO6 */ "tx-tcp6-segmentation",
/* NETIF_F_FSO */ "tx-fcoe-segmentation",
"",
"",
/* NETIF_F_FCOE_CRC */ "tx-checksum-fcoe-crc",
They seem to have caused this mess in the first place and I would
think they could be removed entirely.
I will resend the patch later today as inline. Sorry about that.
Franco
From: Michał Mirosław <hidden>
Date: 2011-05-12 11:33:41
W dniu 12 maja 2011 11:13 użytkownik Franco Fichtner [off-list ref] napisał:
On 12/05/11 10:55, Michał Mirosław wrote:quoted
2011/5/12 Franco Fichtner [off-list ref]:quoted
I found this while skimming through recent net-next patches. I'm not quite sure if the padding in this struct is correct now.Nice catch. But please send the patch inline instead of as an attachment.Thanks, but I have a short question. Are the empty strings in this struct really needed? /* NETIF_F_TSO6 */ "tx-tcp6-segmentation", /* NETIF_F_FSO */ "tx-fcoe-segmentation", "", "", /* NETIF_F_FCOE_CRC */ "tx-checksum-fcoe-crc", They seem to have caused this mess in the first place and I would think they could be removed entirely.
Mahesh Bandewar tried to do some cleanup in how feature bits are defined using an enum, but it wasn't completed. If that cleanup was completed, this array could be initialized using C99 style: [NETIF_F_TSO6_BIT] = "tx-tcp6-segmentation", (This has more advantages than pure aesthetics.) For now those empty strings have to stay, as the array positions are relevant. Best Regards, Michał Mirosław