Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] wireless: Use eth_<foo>_addr instead of memset

[Joe Perches]

On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 09:44 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > 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???

Yes.

> That *clearly* isn't true, and if it was then
> this patch wouldn't be safe at all.

And why is that?

Until patch 1 of this series, eth_zero_addr and
eth_broadcast_addr was just an inline for a memset.

Even after patch 1, it's effectively still memset.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/