On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, Alexander Holler wrote: > > Hmmm. I won't say that ((packed,aligned(4))) is wrong. But it's not > > clearly necessary either. > > Maybe I should have added a "cosmetic:" in front of the subject of the > patch. ;) > > Using packed doesn't seem to be necessary (at least not with those > versions of gcc I'm using here), I've tried both versions (on arm, > without packed and with packed, aligned(4)) and both are working. I've > only posted the patch because I found the usage of packed, aligned(4) > much clearer than without packed. And It might help avoiding such > discussions like this with people like me who aren't that deep involved > in gcc-specific implementation details. ;) > > Anyway, feel free to nack that patch. I don't really care and just > thought I should post it (e.g. as an alternative to removing that packed). There are other structures that need to avoid padding but aren't marked ((packed)), such as ehci_qtd and ehci_qh_hw in drivers/usb/host/ehci.h. I don't see why those in ehci_def.h should get special treatment. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
