From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2] ath9k: collect statistics about Rx-Dup and Rx-STBC packets
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:21:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <517C79B7.1090306@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmokUFtFjQk0T87E57kEhp40f1v4XgJL-iN35Bzo4h-McDQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2013-04-27 9:06 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 27 April 2013 11:53, Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de> wrote:
>
>>> (And then go and re-align things inside that struct so you don't waste
>>> space.)
>>
>>
>> hmm.. what do you mean here?
>
> Structure alignment? Well, you typically want to have everything be
> dword aligned (32 bits) or word (16 bits) aligned. Otherwise the
> compiler may insert extra padding between fields in order to meet
> alignment requirements on platforms that need it (MIPS, older ARM) or
> platforms that perform slower (newer ARM.)
I think in struct ath_rx_status alignment does not matter much, it's
only kept on the stack anyway. But yes, in other cases it makes sense to
pay attention to padding to keep structs small. I also agree that making
rs_flags u16 is a good idea.
> Now, i don't know what 'bool' is, whether it's a byte, word or dword.
bool is a byte.
> That "is_mybeacon" field should probably be just another flag in
> rx_status, then just extend 'rs_flags' to 16 bits and include it. That
> way the alignment is easy to see - all the fields in rx_status and the
> htc rx_status structs have explicit sizes. :-)
>
> Felix, what do you think?
Sounds good :)
- Felix
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de>,
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2] ath9k: collect statistics about Rx-Dup and Rx-STBC packets
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 03:21:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <517C79B7.1090306@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmokUFtFjQk0T87E57kEhp40f1v4XgJL-iN35Bzo4h-McDQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2013-04-27 9:06 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 27 April 2013 11:53, Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de> wrote:
>
>>> (And then go and re-align things inside that struct so you don't waste
>>> space.)
>>
>>
>> hmm.. what do you mean here?
>
> Structure alignment? Well, you typically want to have everything be
> dword aligned (32 bits) or word (16 bits) aligned. Otherwise the
> compiler may insert extra padding between fields in order to meet
> alignment requirements on platforms that need it (MIPS, older ARM) or
> platforms that perform slower (newer ARM.)
I think in struct ath_rx_status alignment does not matter much, it's
only kept on the stack anyway. But yes, in other cases it makes sense to
pay attention to padding to keep structs small. I also agree that making
rs_flags u16 is a good idea.
> Now, i don't know what 'bool' is, whether it's a byte, word or dword.
bool is a byte.
> That "is_mybeacon" field should probably be just another flag in
> rx_status, then just extend 'rs_flags' to 16 bits and include it. That
> way the alignment is easy to see - all the fields in rx_status and the
> htc rx_status structs have explicit sizes. :-)
>
> Felix, what do you think?
Sounds good :)
- Felix
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-28 1:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-27 15:25 [ath9k-devel] [PATCH RFC] ath9k: collect statistics about Rx-Dup and Rx-STBC packets Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 15:25 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 18:39 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v2] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 18:39 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 18:51 ` [ath9k-devel] " Adrian Chadd
2013-04-27 18:51 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-04-27 18:53 ` [ath9k-devel] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 18:53 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 19:06 ` [ath9k-devel] " Adrian Chadd
2013-04-27 19:06 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-04-27 19:13 ` [ath9k-devel] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-27 19:13 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 1:21 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2013-04-28 1:21 ` [ath9k-devel] " Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 6:41 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH v3] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 6:41 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 12:51 ` [ath9k-devel] [PATCH RFC] " Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 12:51 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 14:13 ` [ath9k-devel] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 14:13 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 15:03 ` [ath9k-devel] " Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 15:03 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 19:19 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 19:19 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 19:20 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 19:20 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-29 6:45 ` Wojciech Dubowik
2013-04-29 6:45 ` Wojciech Dubowik
2013-04-29 7:20 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-29 7:20 ` Oleksij Rempel
2013-04-28 14:54 ` Ben Greear
2013-04-28 14:54 ` Ben Greear
2013-04-28 15:08 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 15:08 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 15:15 ` Ben Greear
2013-04-28 15:15 ` Ben Greear
2013-04-28 15:32 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-04-28 15:32 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-05-08 5:32 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-05-08 5:32 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-05-08 16:07 ` Ben Greear
2013-05-08 16:07 ` Ben Greear
2013-05-08 22:45 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-05-08 22:45 ` Adrian Chadd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=517C79B7.1090306@openwrt.org \
--to=nbd@openwrt.org \
--cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.