> I think the check should be (__alignof__(lock) < __alignof__(rwlock_t)),
> otherwise it will still pass when you have structure with attribute((packed,aligned(2)))
reasonable!
>
>> 1, it is alignof bug for default gcc on my fc15 and Ubuntu 11.10 etc?
>>
>> struct sub {
>> int raw_lock;
>> char a;
>> };
>> struct foo {
>> struct sub z;
>> int slk;
>> char y;
>> }__attribute__((packed));
>>
>> struct foo f1;
>>
>> __alignof__(f1.z.raw_lock) is 4, but its address actually can align on
>> one byte.
>
> That looks like correct behavior, because the alignment of raw_lock inside of
> struct sub is still 4. But it does mean that there can be cases where the
> compile-time check is not sufficient, so we might want the run-time check
> as well, at least under some config option.
what's your opinion of this, Ingo?
