[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC v2 1/7] hashtable: introduce a small and naive hashtable

    On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 11:41:34PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
    > I forgot to comment on that one, sorry.
    > If we put hash entries after struct hash_table we don't take the
    > bits field size into account, or did I miss something?

    So, if you do the following,

    struct {
    struct {
    int i;
    long ar[];
    } B;
    long __ar_storage[32];
    } A;

    It should always be safe to dereference[31]. I'm not sure
    whether this is something guaranteed by C tho. Maybe compilers are
    allowed to put members in reverse order but I think we already depend
    on the above.



     \ /
      Last update: 2012-08-04 00:21    [W:0.042 / U:31.372 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site