From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Lord Subject: Re: [PATCH] sata_nv ADMA/NCQ support for nForce4 Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:54:56 -0400 Message-ID: <45354320.6030009@rtr.ca> References: <452C7C1D.3040704@shaw.ca> <20061011103038.GK6515@kernel.dk> <452F053B.2000906@shaw.ca> <20061013080434.GE6515@kernel.dk> <45344F4D.6070703@shaw.ca> <45345015.2010601@rtr.ca> <45345B16.4090505@shaw.ca> <4535032F.2080807@rtr.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from rtr.ca ([64.26.128.89]:39437 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750831AbWJQUy6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:54:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Roland Dreier Cc: Robert Hancock , Jens Axboe , Allen Martin , Jeff Garzik , linux-kernel , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, prakash@punnoor.de Roland Dreier wrote: > Mark> I was thinking more about the non wordsized fields, such as > Mark> the various u8 bytes that gcc will lay out differently > Mark> depending upon endianess. > > I don't know of any gcc version that changes the order of struct > fields. You might be thinking of bitfields, which are laid out in an > endian-dependent way. Ack. And also thinking about other compilers I work with, which apparently are not so friendly. You are correct -- I just verified it (again) for myself on x86 & PPC, and the layout of u8 doesn't change. Cheers!