Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 14:00:28 +0100 From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org> Cc: net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: new arp code snapshot for review... Message-ID: <1084885227.23208.3.camel@builder02.qubesoft.com> In-Reply-To: <20040518014828.B2380@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20040425094940.A50968@xorpc.icir.org> <200405162013.33894.dfr@nlsystems.com> <Pine.GSO.4.60.0405181021470.8050@zeus> <20040518014828.B2380@xorpc.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2004-05-18 at 09:48, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> I will try to remove as many assumptions as possible.
> thanks for the feedback.
I think that in your prototype, the only assumption was in struct
llentry. I would suggest defining it as something like:
struct llentry {
struct llentry *lle_next;
struct mbuf *la_hold;
uint16_t flags; /* see values in if_ether.h */
uint8_t la_preempt;
uint8_t la_asked;
time_t expire;
struct in_addr l3_addr;
uint8_t ll_addr[0];
};
Where the allocation of them uses something like 'malloc(sizeof(struct
llentry) + ifp->if_addrlen)'.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1084885227.23208.3.camel>