code review 174720043: go.net/ipv6: update TODOs

x/net/ipv6: update TODOs

TODOs for stub files are unnecessary because they are stubs.
Also adds TODOs that need to be treated for spurious word
boundary access on some CPU architecture such as ARM, Power.

[mikio, 2014-11-09 14:28:05]

Hello iant@golang.org (cc: golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com),

I'd like you to review this change to
https://code.google.com/p/go.net

[iant, 2014-11-09 18:01:26]

https://codereview.appspot.com/174720043/diff/40001/ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix.go
File ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/174720043/diff/40001/ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix...
ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix.go:23: // TODO(mikio): fix spurious word boundary
access
Let's use different wording here.  Despite your explanation I still don't
understand what you  mean by "spurious word boundary."  I don't see anything
"spurious" here.  How about "fix potential misaligned memory access"?

[mikio, 2014-11-10 03:08:51]

ptal

https://codereview.appspot.com/174720043/diff/40001/ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix.go
File ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix.go (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/174720043/diff/40001/ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix...
ipv6/control_rfc2292_unix.go:23: // TODO(mikio): fix spurious word boundary
access
On 2014/11/09 18:01:26, iant wrote:
> Let's use different wording here.  Despite your explanation I still don't
> understand what you  mean by "spurious word boundary."  I don't see anything
> "spurious" here.  How about "fix potential misaligned memory access"?

Done.

[iant, 2014-11-10 16:10:03]

LGTM

[mikio, 2014-11-10 21:56:50]

*** Submitted as
https://code.google.com/p/go/source/detail?r=6554114436a5&repo=net ***

x/net/ipv6: update TODOs

TODOs for stub files are unnecessary because they are stubs.
Also adds TODOs that need to be treated for spurious word
boundary access on some CPU architecture such as ARM, Power.

LGTM=iant
R=iant
CC=golang-codereviews
https://codereview.appspot.com/174720043