| 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> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] IPSec: Use of "sizeof" for header sizes, part II, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Must dev->set_multicast_list() complete before returning?, Donald Becker |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] IPSec: Use of "sizeof" for header sizes, part II, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] IPSec: Use of "sizeof" for header sizes, part II, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |