On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Boaz Harrosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris you might want to change the definitions at linux/types.h
> to:
>
> typedef struct { __u8 b[3]; } __be24, __le24 __packed;
>
> With gcc it will not help with the proceeding fields, and the
> containing struct will need it's own "__packed" declaration
> but it will keep it packed with previous fields.I haven't seen padding added simply because of a nested structure boundary, but I'm not up on all the ABIs for the different architectures. Obviously a containing structure would want to have the 24-bit type adjacent to an 8-bit type, or have it's own packed attribute if needed. It shouldn't hurt, in this case the members shouldn't be expected to have more than byte alignment anyway, but I can't see how it would help. If there's a particular arch that might be a problem I'm happy to look into it, but I don't want to start throwing packed attributes around just in case. Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
