From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 18 18:24:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6395416A4CE; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:24:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from blake.polstra.com (blake.polstra.com [64.81.189.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E380D43D31; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:24:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) Received: from strings.polstra.com (dsl081-189-067.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.189.67]) by blake.polstra.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7IIOpfQ097375 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:24:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jdp@strings.polstra.com) Received: (from jdp@localhost) by strings.polstra.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i7IIOpvf020407; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:24:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jdp) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.5 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <41239E0A.30508@elischer.org> Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:24:51 -0700 (PDT) From: John Polstra To: Julian Elischer X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.499922, version=0.14.5 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: re@freebsd.org Subject: Re: netgraph only on i386/ia64 - why ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 18:24:55 -0000 On 18-Aug-2004 Julian Elischer wrote: > John Polstra wrote: >> >> There is one problem with netgraph on 64-bit platforms. The ng_msghdr >> struct is 52 bytes / 4-byte aligned (see ng_message.h). That means >> the message payload is not well-aligned for 64-bit platforms. It >> would be nice to fix that (and bump NG_VERSION, of course). Nobody >> ever guaranteed that the message payload would be aligned, but it >> makes things a lot more convenient. > > if we do this we should do it now so that we have a consistent ABI from 5.3 on.. > > scott (et al), should we pad an extra 4 bytes in this now? > it's low/no risk, but better now than after 5.3 has been released.. I'd really like to see this change happen. Julian, would it require bumping just NG_VERSION, or should NG_ABI_VERSION change too? John