lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 25/25] [PATCH] add paravirtualization support for x86_64
Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> On 8/9/07, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
>
>>> Does it really matter?
>>>
>>>
>> Well, yes, if alignment is an issue.
>>
> Of course, But the question rises from the context that they are both
> together at the beginning. So they are not making anybody non-aligned.
> Then the question: Why would putting it in the end be different to
> putting them _together_, aligned at the beginning ?
>

Well, the point is that if you add new ones then alignment may be an
issue. Putting them at the end (with a comment explaining why they're
there) will make it more robust. Though splitting them into their own
sub-structure would probably be better.

Hm. So x86-64 doesn't make 64-bit pointers be 64-bit aligned?

J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-08-09 09:17    [W:0.191 / U:2.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site