Re: drivers/block/ub.c

[Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>]

On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:50:58 -0700
Matthew Dharm <mdharm-kernel@one-eyed-alien.net> wrote:

> > 	struct txd {
> > 		u32 dma_addr;
> > 		u32 length;
> > 	};
> > 
> > It is just total and utter madness to put a packed or the proposed
> > __nopadding__ attribute on that structure.  Yet this seems to be
> > what was suggested now and at the beginning of this thread.
> 
> I guess, in the end, what this comes down to is the fact that we're all
> going to get bitten on the ass when we finally get to a platform where the
> default alignment is 64-bits, which would then (by default) add padding to
> the above structure.
> 
> How long until that time comes?  Likely within my lifetime, and I'd rather
> not have to re-write working code into more working code because I couldn't
> express to the compiler what I needed it to do.

I, for one, am not engaging into such flights of fancy as a platform
with larger than natural alignment requirements. Would you even read
what you're writing? The whole freaking world abandons silly platforms
and moves to x86 extensions and you're fantasizing about a return
to Cray-1. It just ain't happening!

My ass is completely at ease about being bitten by your imaginary monsters.

-- Pete