Arjan van de Ven wrote:
\> as a general rule, it's a lot better to sort structures big-to-small, to
make sure alignments inside the struct are minimized and don't suck too
much. This is especially important to get right for 32/64 bit
compatibility. This comment is true for most structures in this header
file; please consider this at least
Doesn't that cause an unnatural field order?
Does it matter?
Just a matter of taste.
for example, in some
structures I separated in and out variables. Sorting by size is a bit
like sorting alphabetically.
Anyway I observed 32/64 bit compatibility religiously.
but you did take the alignment rules of 64 bit variables into account,
eg 32 bit has it 4 byte aligned, while 64 bit has it 8 byte aligned..
you are 100% sure even your 32 bit structures have all 64 bit values 8
byte aligned?
(you get this automatic if you sort by size)
Also you made sure that if you have such implicit padding that you zero
out the memory between the fields to avoid information leaks?
I put explicit padding everywhere.
Sorting by size at least makes this all go away.....
True. I'll rethink it.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
-
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]
