On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 06:53:21PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 01:49:02AM +0800, Tao Zhou wrote:
> > > +struct rv_monitor {
> > > + const char *name;
> > > + const char *description;
> > > + bool enabled;
> >
> > Can the 'bool enabled;' be put at the end like the definition of
> > structure rv_monitor_def. If '8+8+sizeof(bool)+8+8+8' not the same
> > as '8+8+8+8+8+sizeof(bool)', I mean is it possible that after the
> > end of stucture there is a int or char not require to align to 8 as
> > an example from my nonsense.
>
> That will make no difference at all. C doesn't allow other variables
> to "fill in the hole" at the end of the structure like that. For
> example, one could legitimately do 'memset(&rvm, sizeof(rvm))',
> and that would wipe out those other variables as well.
I mean if it is possible that if @enabled placed at the end of the
structure rv_monitor will save some bytes.
If @enabled place in between, the next function pointer which is 8 bytes
will align to be in x8 address and the size of structure rv_monitor is
larger than been placed at the end of the structure.
Or the compiler can do magic that I can not guess.
Sorry for my late reply. I am not sure about this. But your reply is not
about what I mean. You say that the size of structure is the same(I doute about this).
But what my concert is that the other data next to the structure rv_monitor
how to align if placing the @enabled at the end.
Place in between, bytes:
8+8+8(padd)+8+8+8=48
Place at the end, bytes:
8+8+8+8+8+sizeof(bool)=?
? is small than 48 and the data next to the data structure rv_monitor can use
the saved byte which is the result of placing @enabled at the end of structure
to place the data.
|