[PATCH] USB: ehci: use packed,aligned(4) instead of removing the packed attribute
Alan Stern
stern at rowland.harvard.edu
Tue Jun 21 10:58:19 EDT 2011
On Mon, 20 Jun 2011, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > We don't fall into any of these cases, and therefore as you say, we
> > don't need packed. Arnd and I have both explained this. So why do you
> > keep arguing that we do need it?
>
> Please show me where I keep arguing that you need it?
Not explicitly perhaps. But you did write:
> Doesn't mean that because it used to work that it is strictly correct.
> Wouldn't be the first time that a GCC upgrade broke the kernel because
> the kernel wasn't describing things properly enough.
which strongly implies that "packed" is needed. You also wrote:
> Yes, but that's a consequence of not being able to access those fields
> in their naturally aligned position anymore. Hence the addition of the
> align attribute to tell the compiler that we know that the structure is
> still aligned to a certain degree letting the compiler to avoid
> byte-oriented instructions when possible.
which is predicated on the assumption that "packed" is needed.
Alan Stern
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list