On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 06:28 -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > My question is a bit more fundamental: Why are you using this new union > in your patches instead of simply passing around "struct sockaddr" > pointers? If you did that, then you could simply replace all of the > rpc_* wrappers with your generic ones, since you wouldn't need to do > the cast to this (seemingly unnecessary) union. Because there are some places have to interpret the structure, without this union, they need to cast to either sockaddr_in or sockaddr_in6 first, which is not as pretty as using a union. For example, the code in netpoll: ipv6_addr_equal(daddr, &np->local_ip.sin6.sin6_addr) without the union, it would be: struct sockaddr_in6 *addr = (struct sockaddr_in6 *) &np->local_ip; ipv6_addr_equal(daddr, addr->sin6_addr); > > FWIW, I too am happy to see these routines moved to common code. I just > wonder whether it might make more sense to use the existing convention > instead of this new union. > Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
