From owner-freebsd-net  Wed Jul 12 12:49: 6 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B308137B701
	for <net@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 12 Jul 2000 12:49:03 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu)
Received: (from wollman@localhost)
	by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA74525;
	Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:48:54 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from wollman)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 15:48:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <200007121948.PAA74525@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To: itojun@iijlab.net
Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: change to struct route
In-Reply-To: <25456.963427321@coconut.itojun.org>
References: <25456.963427321@coconut.itojun.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

<<On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 03:42:01 +0900, itojun@iijlab.net said:

> 	i'll want to do it for freebsd too (maybe post-4.1 item).
> 	are you guys happy with this?  the reason why we do not change
> 	the type for ro_dst (into sockaddr_storage) is that, if we do so,
> 	it will add too many typecasts in existing code.


> struct route {
> 	struct  rtentry *ro_rt;
> 	struct  sockaddr ro_dst;
> 	char padding[sizeof(struct sockaddr_storage) - sizeof(struct sockaddr)];
> };

I'd rather see:

struct route {
	struct	rtentry *ro_rt;
	union	{
		struct	sockaddr dstu_dst;
		struct	sockaddr_storage dstu_dstss;
	}	ro_dstu;
};

#define	ro_dst		ro_dstu.dstu_dst
#define	ro_dstss	ro_dstu.dstu_dstss

...which would be the Traditional BSD Way to do it.

-GAWollman

--
Garrett A. Wollman   | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same
wollman@lcs.mit.edu  | O Siem / The fires of freedom 
Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame
MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA|                     - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message