From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] of/flattree: eliminate cell_t typedef From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Segher Boessenkool In-Reply-To: References: <20091124081316.6216.66310.stgit@angua> <20091124081827.6216.1896.stgit@angua> <1259207974.16367.226.camel@pasglop> <1259213266.16367.274.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 08:40:28 +1100 Message-ID: <1259271628.18084.31.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, davem@davemloft.net List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 22:36 +0100, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > >> You're right, it's not, but makes merging less complex, and then I > >> can > >> refactor properly. > > > > Still, make them __be32 at least > > There is no alignment guarantee at all either, better make it all u8 > and use accessor functions everywhere. Well... if you want to force using an accessor, then make it an opaque type. But __be32 is fine. It doesn't necessarily convey alignment and besides, there happens to -be- aligned in almost all cases so far :-) The flat tree format guarantees 32-bit alignment for the start of a property, so we are good here I think. Cheers, Ben.