From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:03:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m2HK3gdU024022 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:03:43 -0700 Received: from sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 8BD7C6B13EB for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id Ow7EGSYk5mD6D6hB for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <47DECEBD.10604@sandeen.net> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:04:13 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix dir2 shortform structures on ARM old ABI References: <47DB4181.7040603@sandeen.net> <20080315041722.GA25621@josefsipek.net> <47DB4F4F.8030407@sandeen.net> <20080315042703.GA28242@josefsipek.net> <47DB51A3.70200@sandeen.net> <20080315045147.GB28242@josefsipek.net> <47DEB930.7020108@sandeen.net> <20080317195313.GB16500@josefsipek.net> In-Reply-To: <20080317195313.GB16500@josefsipek.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Josef 'Jeff' Sipek Cc: xfs-oss Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 01:32:16PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: >> >>> Josef 'Jeff' Sipek, wondering exactly how passionate one can get about >>> structure member alignment :) >> Very. ;) >> >> Tossing packed at all the ondisk stuctures bloats things badly on ia64. >> >> cvs/linux-2.6-xfs> wc -l before.dis >> 166688 before.dis >> cvs/linux-2.6-xfs> wc -l after.dis >> 182294 after.dis >> >> That's +15606 lines. > > I'm not done yet! :-P > > First of all, the patch I showed you actually breaks a few things that I > still need to fix. Oh, I wasn't trying to blame you or our patch specifically, just wanted to highlight what I consider to be the bad idea of giving gcc a bunch of directives that IMHO we don't need. > Second, I need to find out whether all the affected structures are always > aligned on some boundary (probably 4 or 8 byte). If there indeed is some > alignment, there might be a way to reduce those 15k extra lines to something > a whole lot less - I hope. To what end? What are you trying to fix? If it's not reduced to 0 then your change is introducing regressions, IMHO. Respectfully, ;) -Eric