From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932412Ab3L3XRJ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 30 Dec 2013 18:17:09 -0500
Received: from smtprelay0187.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.187]:45205 "EHLO
	smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932343Ab3L3XRI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 30 Dec 2013 18:17:08 -0500
X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D
X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:973:982:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1540:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3866:3867:3870:3871:3873:3874:4321:5007:7652:10004:10400:10450:10455:10848:11232:11658:11914:12114:12517:12519:12663:12740:13069:13149:13230:13311:13357:19904:19999,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNS
X-HE-Tag: fruit98_3dc50e9d2fc21
X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2255
Message-ID: <1388445422.26796.38.camel@joe-AO722>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/11]  use ether_addr_equal_64bits
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
        Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>,
        Intel Linux Wireless <ilw@linux.intel.com>,
        "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 15:17:02 -0800
In-Reply-To: <1388445188.18164.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
References: <1388427307-8691-1-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
	 <1388427307-8691-5-git-send-email-Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>
	 <1388429761.4410.1.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1312302057420.2209@localhost6.localdomain6>
	 <1388438724.4573.2.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
	 <20131230215701.GA4938@khazad-dum.debian.net>
	 <1388445188.18164.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4-0ubuntu1 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, 2013-12-31 at 00:13 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-12-30 at 19:57 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Dec 2013, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-12-30 at 20:58 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > > Is there any way we could catch (sparse, or some other script?) that
> > > > > struct reorganising won't break the condition needed ("within a
> > > > > structure that contains at least two more bytes")?
> > > > 
> > > > What kind of reorganizing could happen?  Do you mean that the programmer 
> > > > might do at some time in the future, or something the compiler might do?
> > > 
> > > I'm just thinking of a programmer, e.g. changing a struct like this:
> > > 
> > >  struct foo {
> > >    u8 addr[ETH_ALEN];
> > > -  u16 dummy;
> > >  };

I don't know of a way to catch that.
Anyone else?