From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 01/24] arm: initial Xen support Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 06:42:37 -0400 Message-ID: <20120801104237.GB7227@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <1343316846-25860-1-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com> <20120726163020.GB9222@phenom.dumpdata.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , "linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org" , Ian Campbell , "arnd@arndb.de" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "Tim (Xen.org)" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > > > +struct pvclock_wall_clock { > > > + u32 version; > > > + u32 sec; > > > + u32 nsec; > > > +} __attribute__((__packed__)); > > > > That is weird. It is 4+4+4 = 12 bytes? Don't you want it to be 16 bytes? > > I agree that 16 bytes would be a better choice, but it needs to match > the struct in Xen that is defined as follow: > > uint32_t wc_version; /* Version counter: see vcpu_time_info_t. */ > uint32_t wc_sec; /* Secs 00:00:00 UTC, Jan 1, 1970. */ > uint32_t wc_nsec; /* Nsecs 00:00:00 UTC, Jan 1, 1970. */ Would it make sense to add some paddigin then at least? In both cases? Or is it too late for this?