Hello Jan, On Tuesday, 27. October 2009 11:04:38 Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Monday 2009-10-26 10:03, Thomas Jarosch wrote: > >On Friday, 23. October 2009 17:48:04 you wrote: > >> >I'm wondering if this is the best approach to support big endian > >> > machines with all those #ifdefs? > >> > >> The second is ok, though I dunno why he did not chose to do the > >> same in the first. Hence: > > > >Thanks for the fix! What about the left shift operations f.e. in > >ipt_acc_handle_get_data()? The original patch touched those, too. > > Adding this in. Thanks! See one little remark below. > @@ -817,7 +817,7 @@ static int ipt_acc_handle_get_data(uint32_t handle, > void *to_user) struct ipt_acc_mask_24 *network = > network_16->mask_24[b]; > if (ipt_acc_handle_copy_data(to_user, &to_user_pos, > - &tmpbuf_pos, network, net_ip, (b << 16))) > + &tmpbuf_pos, network, ntohl(net_ip), (b << 16))) > return -1; > } > } I'm starting to get my mind ready for endian issues :) The "net_OR_mask" is in host order if I understood it correctly, so shouldn't this read "(b << 8)"? Cheers, Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
