Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Since the SACK receive cache doesn't need the data to be in host
>> > order we also remove the ntohl in the checking loop.
>> ...
>> > - for (i = 0; i< num_sacks; i++) {
>> > - __u32 start_seq = ntohl(sp[i].start_seq);
>> > - __u32 end_seq = ntohl(sp[i].end_seq);
>> > + for (i = 0; i < num_sacks; i++) {
>> > + __u32 start_seq = sp[i].start_seq;
>> > + __u32 end_seq = sp[i].end_seq;
>
> Yes. The only comparison we do with recv_sack_cache entries is != and
> that works for net-endian just fine.
In that case you need to use __be32 before Al Viro starts coming after
you :)
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
