From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alessandro Rubini <rubini-list@gnudd.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 23:18:21 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 3/3 v2] Replace CONFIG_SYS_GBL_DATA_SIZE by
 auto-generated value
In-Reply-To: <20101026211233.BB83B152451@gemini.denx.de>
References: <20101026211233.BB83B152451@gemini.denx.de>
	<20101026203811.D0EF1152451@gemini.denx.de>
	<1288104730-25651-1-git-send-email-wd@denx.de>
	<1288101601-24871-4-git-send-email-wd@denx.de>
	<20101026195429.GA1349@morgana.i.gnudd.com>
	<20101026205756.GA2139@morgana.i.gnudd.com>
Message-ID: <20101026211821.GA2528@morgana.i.gnudd.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

> Is it guaranteed (I mean by the C standard) that the alignment of a
> struct (which affects only the possible start address) also has effect
> on the sizeof() for that struct, in the sense that sizeof() is
> guaranteed to be a multiple of that alignment requirement?

Yes. Because if you make an array, all of them must be aligned, and
the size of an array is a multiple of sizeof(array_item).  While
alignment is not in the standard, the sizeof/array relationship is.

It's in C99 draft (http://busybox.net/~landley/c99-draft.html)

      6.5.3.4 The sizeof operator

      #6

      EXAMPLE 2 Another use of the sizeof operator is to compute the
      number of elements in an array:
        sizeof array / sizeof array[0]

/alessandro