[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55F1CA06.3020904@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 19:20:54 +0100
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To: Grant Grundler <grundler@...gle.com>
CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Olof Johansson <olofj@...omium.org>,
Seshagiri Holi <sholi@...dia.com>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: block: Add new ioctl to send multi commands
On 10/09/15 18:10, Grant Grundler wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 1:24 AM, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> - you have some implicit padding after the structure and should replace that
>>> with explictit pad bytes to extend the structure to a multiple of its
>>> alignment (8 bytes).
>>
>> Would padding with __u32 at the end be sufficient here? I assume the
>> __u32 would be 32-bit aligned. However, was not sure if this would
>> always be the case.
>
> Is there something wrong with implicit padding?
> Only one copy of the structure is passed to the kernel for any given call.
>
>>>>> struct mmc_ioc_multi_cmd {
>>>>> __u64 num_of_cmds;
>>>>> struct mmc_ioc_cmd cmds[0];
>>>>> };
>
> I think this would work just as well. But doesn't "pointer to an
> array" require 32-bit ioctl compat handling?
> We were trying to avoid a 32-bit user space compatibility handler.
I think that this is fine as it is a zero length array [0] and not a
pointer.
Cheers
Jon
[0] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Zero-Length.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists