From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: compare_ether_addr[_64bits]() has no ordering
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 23:35:36 -0700
Message-ID: <1336458936.29640.2.camel@joe2Laptop>
References: <1336399961.4325.30.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <20120507.192052.181899101154654170.davem@davemloft.net>
	 <1336454744.4328.2.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
	 <20120508.022647.1186809783650560801.davem@davemloft.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: johannes@sipsolutions.net, eric.dumazet@gmail.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from perches-mx.perches.com ([206.117.179.246]:55892 "EHLO
	labridge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753181Ab2EHGfj (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 8 May 2012 02:35:39 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20120508.022647.1186809783650560801.davem@davemloft.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 02:26 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
> Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 07:25:44 +0200
> 
> > I suppose I could fix those first and then later change the type, but I
> > think having a "compare_ether_addr" function that returns *false* when
> > they *match* would be rather confusing. I'd rather have
> > "equal_ether_addr()" that returns *true* when they match.
> > 
> > I guess we could introduce equal_ether_addr() though and slowly convert,
> > keeping compare_ether_addr() as a sort of wrapper around it.
> 
> Indeed, this is one way to proceed.

perhaps is_equal_ether_addr or is_same_ether_addr instead?