On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 21:15:29 +
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 17:34, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:23:15 +
> > Peter Maydell wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 14:13, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:58:03 +
>
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 17:34, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:23:15 +
> Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 14:13, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:58:03 +
> > > Peter Maydell wrote:
> > >
> > > > Taking the address of a field in a pa
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:23:15 +
Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 14:13, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:58:03 +
> > Peter Maydell wrote:
> >
> > > Taking the address of a field in a packed struct is a bad idea, because
> > > it might not be actually ali
On 12/10/2018 08:58 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
Taking the address of a field in a packed struct is a bad idea, because
it might not be actually aligned enough for that pointer type (and
thus cause a crash on dereference on some host architectures). Newer
versions of clang warn about this.
Avoid
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 14:13, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:58:03 +
> Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> > Taking the address of a field in a packed struct is a bad idea, because
> > it might not be actually aligned enough for that pointer type (and
> > thus cause a crash on dereferen
On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 13:58:03 +
Peter Maydell wrote:
> Taking the address of a field in a packed struct is a bad idea, because
> it might not be actually aligned enough for that pointer type (and
> thus cause a crash on dereference on some host architectures). Newer
> versions of clang warn ab
Taking the address of a field in a packed struct is a bad idea, because
it might not be actually aligned enough for that pointer type (and
thus cause a crash on dereference on some host architectures). Newer
versions of clang warn about this.
Avoid the problem by using local copies of the PMCW and
