On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:33:00PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:04 PM, <parav.pan...@emulex.com> wrote:
> >> > +/* mailbox cmd response */
> >> > +struct ocrdma_mbx_rsp {
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 subsys_op;
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 status;
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 rsp_len;
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 add_rsp_len;
> >> > +} __packed;
>
> >> ...similar comments about only using __packed where you really need it...
>
> > This pack is required as it is shared with hardware and need to be
> > of 16 bytes for 32 and 64 bit architecture. Do not wanted to take
> > risk of different compiler versions. So keeping it packed.
>
> I really think if you can't trust your compiler to lay this
> structure out properly, you have a lot of bigger problems. But
> whatever, it's not a big deal.
Doesn't packed penalize all access to the structure on some
architectures, eg sparc?
A static assert is a better choice than packed...
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(ocrdma_mbx_rsp) != 16);
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
