On Wednesday, August 22, 2012 2:54:07 pm Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 22 August 2012 05:02, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Tuesday, August 21, 2012 12:34:42 pm Adrian Chadd wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> What about just creating an ETHER_ADDR_COPY(dst, src) and putting that > >> in a relevant include file, then hide the ugliness there? > >> > >> The same benefits will likely appear when copying wifi MAC addresses > >> to/from headers. > >> > >> Thanks, I'm glad someone noticed this. > > > > I doubt we even _need_ the ugliness. We should just use *dst = *src > > unless there is a compelling reason not to. > > Because it's not very clear? :-) I'd much prefer my array-of-things > copies to be explicit.
Eh? 'struct foo *src, *dst; *dst = *src' is pretty bog-standard C. That isn't really all that obtuse. > Also, the optimisation and compiler silliness may not be THAT obvious > on intel (except when you're luigi and using netmap) but I can't help > but wonder whether the same does hold for MIPS/ARM. Getting it wrong > there will lead to some very very poor performing code. Don't you think there's a really good chance the compiler knows how to copy a structure appropriately for each architecture already? -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
