> > Other than that, I guess I'll apply this, but I really wish there was a > > way to distinguish more easily which of these require alignment and > > which don't. > > My guess is the eth_zero_addr and eth_broadcast functions > are always taking aligned(2) arguments, just like all the > is_<foo>_ether_addr functions. Err, are you serious??? That *clearly* isn't true, and if it was then this patch wouldn't be safe at all. > > eth_zero_addr() doesn,t but is_zero_ether_addr() does. So does > > ether_addr_copy(). Frankly, it's getting a bit confusing, so I can't > > really fault anyone for using memset()/memcpy(). > > I suspect more than anything else all these are historic. I'd expect a mix here, certainly. Not all of them are really old though. johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
