On Fri, 24 July 2009 14:50:25 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:> On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:32:19 +0200> Jörn Engel <joern@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:> > > On Tue, 21 July 2009 01:46:41 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:> > > > > > The data structure is actually packed already, the attribute does not make it better> > > and could be removed. We also have __packed as a shortcut for __attribute__((packed)).> > > > Honestly, I don't know how useful __packed really is. In a shared> > kernel/userspace header, it is only defined for the kernel.> > As I remember, gcc generates worse code for packed structures on many architectures> since it may have to do byte fetchs/recombining to avoid unaligned> accesses. I was talking about "__packed" vs. "__attribute__((packed))". But yes,avoiding packed structures where possible is a good idea. Jörn -- "[One] doesn't need to know [...] how to cause a headache in orderto take an aspirin."-- Scott Culp, Manager of the Microsoft Security Response Center, 2001_______________________________________________Virtualization mailing listVirtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
