Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 18:46:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RFC: eliminating the _IP_VHL hack. Message-ID: <200210152246.g9FMka0o007721@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <60637.1034720233@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <60637.1034720233@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Wed, 16 Oct 2002 00:17:13 +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.ORG> said: > In the meantime absolutely no code has picked up on this idea, It was copied in spirit from OSF/1. > The side effect of having some source-files using the _IP_VHL hack and > some not is that sizeof(struct ip) varies from file to file, Not so. Any compiler which allocates different amounts of storage to one eight-bit member versus two four-bit bitfield members is seriously broken (and would defeat the whole purpose). > I would therefore propose to eliminate the _IP_VHL hack from the kernel > to end this state of (potential) confusion, and invite comments to the > following patch: Much better to delete the bogus BYTE_ORDER kluge from ip.h. (Note that the definition of the bitfields in question has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual byte order in use; it simply relies on the historical behavior of compilers which allocated space for bitfields in BYTE_ORDER order.) -GAWollman To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200210152246.g9FMka0o007721>