On 01/07/2011 07:33 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote: > On 01/07/2011 06:52 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > >>>>>> No, it's not the same issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> On x86 as described on your link, it's just a performance penalty if >>>>>> your members are not aligned. On ARM without fixup, you read actual >>>>>> garbage as described on my article. >>>>> >>>>> Yup, I was more referring to the data not aligning when unioning >>>> >>>> That's nothing to do with this issue. >>>> >>>> With this issue, a correct structure in a typedef or a struct with >>>> correct alignment padding turns to crap because the structure pointed to >>>> is not on a u32 boundary for example. >>> >>> I see. But shouldn't the compiler be taking care of that? -malign? >> >> The compiler will always take care of that, unless someone does >> something really evil in either the code or the gcc options. > > s/will/should/ and I might agree. :) LOL! Well, I am a gcc maintainer, so I have my own opinion about that! :) In any case, I'm happy to bet this is a library bug, not a gcc bug. Andrew. _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
