From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] module: deal with alignment issues in built-in module versions Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:17:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20110217.131702.112601300.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20110217.130115.71101941.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:60232 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753282Ab1BQVQ0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2011 16:16:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: dtor@vmware.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 13:11:56 -0800 > EVERY SINGLE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS WORK FOR "pointer" TOO! It at least will not happen at the current time, because GCC only plays these games on aggregates. Also, for exception tables, we've avoided this problem because we emit the exception tables by hand using inline asm and therefore explicitly control all aspects of the alignment and size. The GCC manual even documents the alignment attribute behavior. Also, please don't shoot the messenger, I didn't make GCC behave this way but I doubt you'll have any luck undoing this behavior in the tools which therefore means as pragmatists we have to handle it one way or another.