cvs commit: src/sbin/ipfw ipfw2.c

[Luigi Rizzo]

On Sat, Sep 11, 2004 at 04:53:59PM -0700, John-Mark Gurney wrote:
> Christian S.J. Peron wrote this message on Sat, Sep 11, 2004 at 19:44 +0000:
> >   Currently when ipfw(8) generates the micro-instructions for rules which
> >   contain O_UID, O_GID and O_JAIL opcodes, the F_NOT or F_OR logical
> >   operator bits get clobbered. Making it impossible to use the ``NOT'' or
> >   ``OR'' operators with uid, gid and jail based constraints.
> >   
> >   The ipfw_insn instruction template contains a ``len'' element which
> >   stores two pieces of information, the size of the instruction
> >   (in 32-bit words) in the low 6 bits of "len" with the 2 remaining
> >   bits to implement OR and NOT.
> 
> Why don't we use the bit field?
> 	u_int8_t	logic : 2;
> 	u_int8_t	len : 8;
> 
> considering this is already used by the enum..  It'd make bugs like
> these less likely...

because the other field is 6 not 8, plus the alignment i think is
compiler dependent and the generated code not often very
fast, and this stuff is in the critical path in the kernel.

cheers
luigi