Re: /proc/net/arp silliness

From: David Ford (
Date: Tue Apr 25 2000 - 13:31:15 EST wrote:

> Hello!
> > beforehand, I chose to maintain that formatting, after all, if it were for
> > program uses, we'd simply stuff it in binary format which would be much
> > faster and easier for the programmer.
> Alas. Seems, we are alone is this opinion. I sign under this. 8)
> > So I don't think my effort has been for uglification of the text, I had a
> > typo. ;) In the end, the new /proc/net/arp looks slightly better.
> Appearance of /proc/net/arp does _not_ bother me AT ALL. I never look into it.
> Appearance of arp.c really bothers me. I look into it every day.
> Alexey

Ok. Let's discuss. Here is the code that was added:

            char tbuf[16];
            sprintf(tbuf, "%u.%u.%u.%u", NIPQUAD(*(u32*)n->primary_key));

v.s. in_ntoa2 which is(was) used three times in all of net/*

in_ntoa() is not used at all. If we are going to be consistent, let's choose a
single method for string and number management in this file, i.e. the hex buffer
a few lines above.

To function or not to function, that is the question.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:10 EST