20.12.2016, 02:22, "Cihangir Akturk" <cakt...@gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 12:52:12AM +0200, Ozgur Karatas wrote:
>> 17.12.2016, 19:43, "Cihangir Akturk" <cakt...@gmail.com>:
>> > In the actual implementation ether_addr_equal function tests for equality
>> to 0
>> > when returning. It seems in commit 0d74c4 it is somehow overlooked to
>> change
>> > this operator to reflect the actual function.
>>
>> why this "return" function need to be ==0? I think, u16 functions read
>> memory but "0" is should not be equalty.
>
> XOR is true only when inputs differ. That means if inputs are the
> same, then it outputs false (0) or whatever you call it. Then we
> perform OR operation between those outputs. So if the result is 0 then
> addr1 and addr2 is equal.
Thanks for this explanation to your patch. In this case the patch mentioned is
valid.
I checked, turned to "!=0" errors.
un-mem.c:29:18: error: ‘!’ (first use in this function)
return ((a[0] ^ b[0]) | (a[1] ^ b[1]) | (a[2] ^ b[2])) != 0;
^
Also, don't need to send patch it secon time :)
>> This way, -for the code to work- memory should be everytime unaligned !=0.
>
> Sorry I didn't quite get the point.
Regards,
~Ozgur
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
