> > Does this mean that gcc will _not_ pad the end of such a member
> > of a structure to ensure that the next one will not share a cache
> > line, if an ordinary alignment directive is issued ?
>
> When I saw what "info gcc" said about __aligned__ variable attributes,
> it talked about aligning the _start_ of the variable/member/etc. Not
> the end ... that'd be controlled by the next variable/member.
>
> See my other post ... start of next structure is controlled by a
> structure level alignment attribute (forcing extra padding at end),
> while start of next _member_ is controlled by member level attributes.
There we have a problem. Strictly speaking there is no next member of
a structure. A compiler is free to reorder members of a structure, apart
from the first.
Regards
Oliver
_______________________________________________________________
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -
http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
