lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/24] arm: initial Xen support
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > +struct pvclock_wall_clock {
> > > > + u32 version;
> > > > + u32 sec;
> > > > + u32 nsec;
> > > > +} __attribute__((__packed__));
> > >
> > > That is weird. It is 4+4+4 = 12 bytes? Don't you want it to be 16 bytes?
> >
> > I agree that 16 bytes would be a better choice, but it needs to match
> > the struct in Xen that is defined as follow:
> >
> > uint32_t wc_version; /* Version counter: see vcpu_time_info_t. */
> > uint32_t wc_sec; /* Secs 00:00:00 UTC, Jan 1, 1970. */
> > uint32_t wc_nsec; /* Nsecs 00:00:00 UTC, Jan 1, 1970. */
>
> Would it make sense to add some paddigin then at least? In both
> cases? Or is it too late for this?

I can see why adding some padding would be useful if the structs were
not packed and we wanted to enforce 32/64 bit compatibility on x86.
However on ARM the field alignments on 32 and 64 bits are the same for
integer values so the padding wouldn't make a difference.
In any case both structs are packed, so the alignment is forced to be the
same by the compiler.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-08-06 13:44    [W:0.106 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site