[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120321205426.GA12492@obsidianresearch.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:54:26 -0600
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To: Roland Dreier <roland@...estorage.com>
Cc: Parav.Pandit@...lex.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] ocrdma: Driver for Emulex OneConnect RDMA adapter
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:33:00PM -0700, Roland Dreier wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:04 PM, <Parav.Pandit@...lex.com> wrote:
> >> > +/* mailbox cmd response */
> >> > +struct ocrdma_mbx_rsp {
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 subsys_op;
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 status;
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 rsp_len;
> >> > + ? ? ? u32 add_rsp_len;
> >> > +} __packed;
>
> >> ...similar comments about only using __packed where you really need it...
>
> > This pack is required as it is shared with hardware and need to be
> > of 16 bytes for 32 and 64 bit architecture. Do not wanted to take
> > risk of different compiler versions. So keeping it packed.
>
> I really think if you can't trust your compiler to lay this
> structure out properly, you have a lot of bigger problems. But
> whatever, it's not a big deal.
Doesn't packed penalize all access to the structure on some
architectures, eg sparc?
A static assert is a better choice than packed...
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(ocrdma_mbx_rsp) != 16);
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists