From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] eth: Rename and properly align br_reserved_address array Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 12:42:19 -0800 Message-ID: <20121104124219.561a7235@s6510.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <1351797122.2883.14.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.solarflarecom.com> <509314F3.6030206@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ben Hutchings , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com To: John Fastabend Return-path: Received: from mail.vyatta.com ([76.74.103.46]:39522 "EHLO mail.vyatta.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751213Ab2KDUm0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Nov 2012 15:42:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: <509314F3.6030206@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:33:55 -0700 John Fastabend wrote: > On 11/1/2012 12:12 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > Since this array is no longer part of the bridge driver, it should > > have an 'eth' prefix not 'br'. > > > > We also assume that either it's 16-bit-aligned or the architecture has > > efficient unaligned access. Ensure the first of these is true by > > explicitly aligning it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings > > --- > > Thanks. > > Acked-by: John Fastabend > I wonder if aligning to 64 bit and doing 64 bit read and mask would be trivially more efficient for this.