Re: [PATCH 2/2] [NETFILTER] remove bogus hand-coded htonll()

[Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1606 bytes --]

On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 09:54:25AM -0700, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 10:43:15AM +0200, Harald Welte wrote:
> 
> > htonll() is nothing else than cpu_to_be64(), so we'd rather call the
> > latter.
> 
> Actually, the htonll() implementation does not seem to be doing what
> cpu_to_be64() is doing.. However, I would assume this is a bug in
> htonll() and this change to use cpu_to_be64() is fixing that. 

ACK.

> Can this bug cause any major problems in the current implementation?

the "current implementation" was only merged after 2.6.13 is released,
so I doubt anyone but the netfilter developers is using it yet.

> I would assume that the first index should have had '-i' added to it, if
> the purpose is to swap byte order.. The code here is leaving some
> arbitrary data in 7 bytes of the 64-bit variable and setting
> (u8*)&out[7] = (u8*)&in[7] in somewhat inefficient way ;-). In addition,
> this looks more like swap-8-bytes-unconditionally than doing this based
> on host byte order..

yes, yes, yes.  Somehow this ancient buggy implementation slipped into
mainline.  I know I had fixed this before.

So please let's all forget about this embarrassing htonll() and move on. 

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>                 http://netfilter.org/
============================================================================
  "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
   architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
   on while IP was being designed."                    -- Paul Vixie

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]