On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 09:40:35AM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 08:45:44PM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
> > Both scsi and geom implement unaligned access functions
> that perform byte > ordering. I never intended to supplant
> them with __bswap*(). W
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 21:17:13 -0800
From: Marcel Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 64 bit endian routines
References: <[
Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Both scsi and geom implement unaligned access functions that perform byte
> ordering. I never intended to supplant them with __bswap*(). What I want
> is for machine/endian.h to have functions that provide 16-64 bit endian
> conversions in both aligned an
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nate Lawson writ
es:
>Both scsi and geom implement unaligned access functions that perform byte
>ordering. I never intended to supplant them with __bswap*(). What I want
>is for machine/endian.h to have functions that provide 16-64 bit endian
>conversions in both
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 08:45:44PM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote:
>
> Both scsi and geom implement unaligned access functions that perform byte
> ordering. I never intended to supplant them with __bswap*(). What I want
> is for machine/endian.h to have functions that provide 16-64 bit endian
> conver
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 20:18:49 -0800
From: Marcel Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike Barcroft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 64 b
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 10:30:58PM -0500, Mike Barcroft wrote:
>
> Most of these could probably be implemented in terms of the __bswap*()
> functions in , except for vendor sources like
> openssl, and htonl and ntohl which already are. I'm not sure if there
> would be an advantage to moving the g
Nate Lawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> First, the simple question: what's the simplest cross-platform way of
> implementing scsi_ulto4b and scsi_4btoul (/sys/cam/scsi/scsi_all.h) for
> 64 bit values. GEOM (/sys/geom/geom_enc.c) implements it via a 64 bit
> cast in g_enc_le8. Is this the best
First, the simple question: what's the simplest cross-platform way of
implementing scsi_ulto4b and scsi_4btoul (/sys/cam/scsi/scsi_all.h) for
64 bit values. GEOM (/sys/geom/geom_enc.c) implements it via a 64 bit
cast in g_enc_le8. Is this the best current way?
Second, anyone done work on unifyi
9 matches
Mail list logo