On Fri, 24 July 2009 14:50:25 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:32:19 +0200 > Jörn Engel <jo...@logfs.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, 21 July 2009 01:46:41 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > The data structure is actually packed already, the attribute does not > > > make it better > > > and could be removed. We also have __packed as a shortcut for > > > __attribute__((packed)). > > > > Honestly, I don't know how useful __packed really is. In a shared > > kernel/userspace header, it is only defined for the kernel. > > As I remember, gcc generates worse code for packed structures on many > architectures > since it may have to do byte fetchs/recombining to avoid unaligned > accesses.
I was talking about "__packed" vs. "__attribute__((packed))". But yes, avoiding packed structures where possible is a good idea. Jörn -- "[One] doesn't need to know [...] how to cause a headache in order to take an aspirin." -- Scott Culp, Manager of the Microsoft Security Response Center, 2001 _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
