On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 05:17:11PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday, July 1, 2016 3:52:44 PM CEST Liviu Dudau wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > or do you mean we should have extra alignment in there so the
> > > private pointer has a minimum alignment higher than the
> > > alignment of struct pci_host_bridge?
> >
> > but this ^. bridge pointer arithmetic means +1 is not necessarily +sizeof(struct pci_host_bridge)
> > bytes. AFAIK that can be rounded to the nearest natural alignment for pointers on that
> > architecture.
>
> No, that's not how it works.
Really? If struct foo takes 31 bytes, and struct foo *p = (struct foo*)64, what's p's
value after p++ ? 95? I thought the compiler is allowed to consider the structure padded so that
p++ is 96.
>
> > > I'm absolutely fine with any of those suggestions, whichever
> > > makes the nicest API.
> >
> > Does anyone need to subclass the pci_host_bridge structure? And is appending data right
> > after the structure useful?
>
> I was basically following the way alloc_etherdev() and a lot of other
> subsystems handle it.
Probably valid if casted to char* ?
Liviu
>
> Arnd
>
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
