On Thursday 14 October 2010 22:59:04 Alex Williamson wrote:
> The structs in question only contain 4 & 8 byte elements, so there
> shouldn't be any change on x86-32 using one-byte aligned packing.
I'm talking about the alignment of the structure, not the members
within the structure. The data structure should be compatible, but
not accesses to it.
> AFAIK, e820 is x86-only, so we don't need to worry about breaking anyone
> else.
You can use qemu to emulate an x86 pc on anything...
> Performance isn't much of a consideration for this type of
> interface since it's only used pre-boot. In fact, the channel between
> qemu and the bios is only one byte wide, so wider alignment can cost
> extra emulated I/O accesses.
Right, the data gets passed as bytes, so it hardly matters in the end.
Still the e820_add_entry assigns data to the struct members, which
it either does using byte accesses and shifts or a multiple 32 bit
assignment. Just because using a one byte alignment technically
results in correct output doesn't make it the right solution.
I don't care about the few cycles of execution time or the few bytes
you waste in this particular case, but you are setting a wrong example
by using smaller alignment than necessary.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
