On 7/3/18 5:24 pm, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 07.03.2018 04:38, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> On 01/02/18 20:35, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru>
>>
>> Ping?
>>
>>
>>> ---
>>> slirp/arp_table.c | 4 ++--
>>> slirp/socket.c | 8 ++++----
>>> slirp/udp.c | 4 ++--
>>> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/slirp/arp_table.c b/slirp/arp_table.c
>>> index 3547043..bac608f 100644
>>> --- a/slirp/arp_table.c
>>> +++ b/slirp/arp_table.c
>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ void arp_table_add(Slirp *slirp, uint32_t ip_addr,
>>> uint8_t ethaddr[ETH_ALEN])
>>> int i;
>>>
>>> DEBUG_CALL("arp_table_add");
>>> - DEBUG_ARG("ip = 0x%x", ip_addr);
>>> + DEBUG_ARG("ip = %s", inet_ntoa(*(struct in_addr *)&ip_addr));
>
> Is this endianness safe? The man-page of inet_ntoa says that the
> function is expecting network byte order, so I wonder whether this works
> right on both, big and little endian hosts?
arp_table_add() is called for either sin_addr (network order) or
slirp_arphdr::ar_sip which is initialized from sin_addr (network order)
with no order conversion. Bugs are still possible, of course :)
--
Alexey
