On Fri, 2022-01-07 at 11:08 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > > > > Or maybe instead just mark the thing __packed (and/or explicitly add the > > padding if needed), it seems weird that we'd send something to the > > *firmware* that has a struct layout subject to compiler/arch padding > > rules. > I would also prefer explicitly adding the padding and leaving the rest > of the code as-is. > Arguably, if you add padding explicitly, you might want to also mark it __packed or add some BUILD_BUG_ON() ensuring there's no more padding added by the compiler because of weird architectures, or whatnot? johannes
