On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 10:45 -0700, Chris Leech wrote:
> Chris Leech wrote:
> > Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> >> @@ -62,7 +60,7 @@ struct timestruc_t {
> >> */
> >> typedef struct {
> >> unsigned len:24;
> >> - unsigned off1:8;
> >> + u8 off1;
> >> u32 off2;
> >> } lxd_t;
> >
> > Shouldn't len here be changed to a __le24? I think this just changed
> > the size of lxd_t by a byte.
>
> Never mind, I see that it's a host order field. And presently surprised
> to see that gcc combines the 24-bit bitfield with the following u8.
Right. I just made a note to throw away this ridiculous structure and
replace it with something sane. It's only used in-memory and there's no
reason not to have an unsigned long long for offset, and an int for len.
This patch didn't seem to be the right place to fix that though.
--
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
