From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Sep 14 17:15:01 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C673106564A;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:15:01 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net)
Received: from mail.xcllnt.net (mail.xcllnt.net [70.36.220.4])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E83A08FC15;
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:15:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from sa-nc-common4-116.static.jnpr.net (natint3.juniper.net
	[66.129.224.36]) (authenticated bits=0)
	by mail.xcllnt.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id p8EHEkdF086007
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net>
In-Reply-To: <201109141230.51827.jhb@freebsd.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:14:48 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A50A53FC-3141-4393-8B32-9248A9BD13A5@xcllnt.net>
References: <306FD881-6140-4DE2-AFF1-95C8079E4187@xcllnt.net>
	<201109140747.21979.jhb@freebsd.org>
	<B76A2235-C31A-46B6-BB99-EC9A661D83BD@bsdimp.com>
	<201109141230.51827.jhb@freebsd.org>
To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1244.3)
Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: ntohll/htonll? [was: Re: ntohq/htonq?]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 17:15:01 -0000

[changing subject to tie *ll to *q for search purposes]

On Sep 14, 2011, at 9:30 AM, John Baldwin wrote:

> On Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:39:31 am Warner Losh wrote:
>>=20
>> hton64/ntoh64 is what Linux has in the kernel.  htonll and ntohll is =
what Solaris and AIX have.
>>=20
>> So (1)  I'd shy away from htonq since that's not as well established =
as the other two in the OS
>> (although googling suggests that many programs use it). (2) I'd =
provide both htonll and hton64
>> with a note saying that hton128 is the wave of the future.
>=20
> Actually, come to think of it, we use *ll rather than *q variants here =
at work
> as well.  I'd vote for (2).

The only problem I'm facing is that htonq/ntohq are well-established
and heavily used within Junos. They are even exposed in the SDK. So,
while I don't mind taking a slightly different route, I do need to
deal with compatibility. But if I need to do that, then there's also
no real reason anymore to add a 64-bit variant to FreeBSD. I need to
see what is possible...

Anyway: I sense a preference for a numerical suffix over any single
or multi-letter suffix.

--=20
Marcel Moolenaar
marcel@xcllnt.net