Jes Sorensen wrote:
And what will break if you make that switch?
If we are lucky, some binary only modules? :-)
But you're right, it may just have to be documented as one of those
nasty issues to watch out for.
What is really poisonous is structures which get padded when all the
members are naturally aligned. Unfortunately gcc produces really crap
code with __attribute__((packed)) on some architectures, so just using
that isn't a good solution. On the other hand, non-AEABI ARM sometimes
needs it!
For the lack of a __attribute__((nopad)) that would throw a warning or
error on excessive padding, I fear that our best option is an __abi
annotation which would enforce certain rules using sparse, and
presumably provide __attribute__((packed)) on ARM:
- All padding must be explicit.
- All members must be naturally aligned.
- No unportable constructs, like non-int-sized bitfields.
-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
