Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 08:19:55 +0000
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 237940] struct nvme_health_information_page{} @ /usr/include/dev/nvme/nvme.h has alignment issues.
Message-ID: <bug-237940-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D237940 Bug ID: 237940 Summary: struct nvme_health_information_page{} @ /usr/include/dev/nvme/nvme.h has alignment issues. Product: Base System Version: 12.0-RELEASE Hardware: Any OS: Any Status: New Severity: Affects Only Me Priority: --- Component: kern Assignee: bugs@FreeBSD.org Reporter: root+FreeBSD@linuxpedia.pl struct nvme_health_information_page { uint8_t critical_warning; uint16_t temperature; uint8_t available_spare; /* ... */ } __packed __aligned(4); has issues with alignment: `temperature` field can't be properly aligned on= any current architecture which seems to defeat the `__aligned(4)` hint. What has bitten me today is that it confuses some code-generating tools, li= ke Rust's bindgen. I already filed a bug to them, as they treat __packed __aligned(4) as __packed(4) - which has a *totally* different meaning - bu= t it would be nice to have some BSD compiler guru took a glimpse at this particu= lar structure and shed some light on whether __aligned(4) is OK here.=20 And yes, I know this structure layout is not BSD's idea =C2=AF\_(=E3=83=84)= _/=C2=AF --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-237940-227>