On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > Why can't we just make the list one item longer than the entry count and
> > stick a NULL on the end of it like normal people ? Then you need one bit
> > which ought to be safe for everyone (and if the bit is a macro any CPU
> > warped enough to have byte alignment is surely going to have top bits
> > spare...)
>
> Well, quite frankly, equally easy is to just add a
>
> __attribute__((aligned(4)))
>
> or whatever the gcc syntax for that is today.. That guarantees that gcc
> lays things out properly.
For structures, not array elements or stack objects. Does gcc now get
aligned correct as an attribute on a stack object ?
Still doesn't answer the rather more important question - why not just
stick a NULL on the end instead of all the nutty hacks ?
-
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]
