On Thu, Apr 4, 2024, at 09:56, Anton Protopopov wrote: > On 24/04/04 12:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2024, at 23:00, Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> > On 4/3/24 10:09 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2024, at 14:33, Anton Protopopov wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Declare this inner union as __attribute__((packed, aligned(2))) such >> >>> that it always is of size 2 and is aligned to 16 bits. >> >> >> >> I think you probably want 32-bit alignment for the structure, >> >> to keep the ABI unchanged on all other architectures. >> > >> > Fwiw, on x86 nothing should change on this regard, see below pahole dump >> > before/after. I think similar might be true for other archs as otherwise >> > we should have seen a kbuild bot complaint on hitting the size assert. >> >> It's not the structure layout that changes, just its alignment. >> Of course this is unlikely to cause actual bugs, but if there there >> is no real need to change it, I would leave the alignment the same >> as before. > > I think the struct will now be automatically 4-byte aligned, as it > has the following layout: > > struct { > u8 a; > u8 b; > u16 c; > u16 d; > union { u16 e; u16 f; } __aligned__(2); > ... > }; > > So if the union is 2-byte aligned, then the struct is automatically > 4-byte aligned, because its address is 6 bytes less than the address > of the union. In fact, as Daniel posted above, pahole shows that the > struct actually has __aligned__(4) attribute in the patched version. > I can add explicit __aligned__(4) to make this clear. Ah right. I misread your patch and assumed that you gave the outer structure 2-byte alignment as well, but it's only the inner union that needs it, which you did correctly. Arnd