lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 09/10] Change table chaining layout
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > Why can't we just make the list one item longer than the entry count and
> > stick a NULL on the end of it like normal people ? Then you need one bit
> > which ought to be safe for everyone (and if the bit is a macro any CPU
> > warped enough to have byte alignment is surely going to have top bits
> > spare...)
>
> Well, quite frankly, equally easy is to just add a
>
> __attribute__((aligned(4)))
>
> or whatever the gcc syntax for that is today.. That guarantees that gcc
> lays things out properly.

For structures, not array elements or stack objects. Does gcc now get
aligned correct as an attribute on a stack object ?

Still doesn't answer the rather more important question - why not just
stick a NULL on the end instead of all the nutty hacks ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-22 23:45    [W:0.143 / U:0.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site