netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] IPSec: Use of "sizeof" for header sizes, part II

To: yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPSec: Use of "sizeof" for header sizes, part II
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 19:34:29 -0800 (PST)
Cc: toml@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030402.122518.62753078.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1049234673.5116.11.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030401.140727.73666851.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <20030402.122518.62753078.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
   From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:25:18 +0900 (JST)

   In article <20030401.140727.73666851.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> (at Tue, 01 Apr 2003 
14:07:27 -0800 (PST)), "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> says:
   
   >    From: Tom Lendacky <toml@xxxxxxxxxx>
   >    Date: 01 Apr 2003 16:04:32 -0600
   >    
   >    Please review and let me know if any changes are required.
   > 
   > Ok, now that I look at this I realize my suggestions from the other
   > day were wrong.
   > 
   > These expressions are huge, it's almost less readable.  Let's compact
   > this, by creating a struct named {ip,ipv6}_esp_header_no_enc_data.
   
   How about just removing 8 bytes from struct {ip,ipv6}_esp_hdr
   like this?
   
Sure, but does anyone need the 8 bytes there?  I thought so, which is
why I didn't think about your suggestion :-)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>