Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 14:59:34 -0600 (CST) From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> To: fenner@parc.xerox.com (Bill Fenner) Cc: fenner@parc.xerox.com, jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Sockets question... Message-ID: <199611152059.OAA28943@brasil.moneng.mei.com> In-Reply-To: <96Nov15.124412pst.177557@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> from "Bill Fenner" at Nov 15, 96 12:44:03 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >Actually... I usually found it easier to do the following. > > And that's what Terry's complaining about; if you have alignment > requirements when writing big_ugly->yadda, those alignment requirements > might not be met by the read() inside of xread(). Ummm... and the problem is...? As far as I am aware, byte oriented data can be written to unaligned addresses on any UNIX architecture that I have seen. xread is explicitly called with what is clearly a byte oriented buffer. If you are possibly worried about something such as the atomicity of reads (potentially valid in a threaded environment, or one using shared memory), I agree that there may be some concern. Since it is not clear to _me_ that such atomicity of access would be valid under the same circumstances even with read(), I would probably code around the situation anyways. Is there some other problem that I am missing? I've done this sort of things for several years now... ... JG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611152059.OAA28943>