From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34022 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pzx1c-0007W5-Uy
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:08:58 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1Pzx1c-0002rF-5r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:08:56 -0400
Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:38384)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@kernel.crashing.org>) id 1Pzx1b-0002qy-UC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:08:56 -0400
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
In-Reply-To: <4D80E852.5020109@suse.de>
References: <1300251423-6715-1-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
	<1300251423-6715-25-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
	<4D80E852.5020109@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 07:08:47 +1100
Message-ID: <1300306127.22236.1177.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 24/26] Implement PAPR virtual SCSI
	interface (ibmvscsi)
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: paulus@samba.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, anton@samba.org, David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>

On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 17:41 +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:

> > +/*
> > + * Common MAD header
> > + */
> > +struct mad_common {
> > +    uint32_t type;
> > +    uint16_t status;
> > +    uint16_t length;
> > +    uint64_t tag;
> 
> Is this an in-memory representation? If so, it should be packed, right? 
> Same goes for the ones below.

Well, all the fields are naturally aligned, as is the structure itself,
do we really need to pack ?

Cheers,
Ben.