Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 11:27:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@aciri.org> Cc: <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: review of change to bridge.h Message-ID: <20011011112700.T84793-100000@wonky.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <200110111815.f9BIFaT12658@iguana.aciri.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > I guess it might be marginally more efficient to > call bcmp() (and rely on it being optimized), or do 3 > comparisons with unsigned short * > > > +#define IS_ETHER_BROADCAST(a) ( \ > > + ((unsigned short *)(a))[0] == 0xffff && \ > > + ((unsigned short *)(a))[1] == 0xffff && \ > > + ((unsigned short *)(a))[2] == 0xffff) You can't assume a short * is aligned either. BTW- this also applies to sparc. > > Apart from this, have you actually tested bridging on > the alpha ? The purpose of the warning was also to > say "look, this code might not work on architectures > not supporting unaligned accesses, so you might need to > hack on the code yourself" Nope. But a better place to say "Bridging is not tested" is to look in a kernel config file. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011011112700.T84793-100000>