Re: [PATCH 2/3] Seperate DSACK from SACK fast path

[David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>]

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:06:07 +1100

> Baruch Even <baruch@ev-en.org> 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 :)

Good catch, Baruch please fix this up :-)