From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org  Mon Mar  6 17:42:26 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390B8CFA5FB
 for <freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Mon,  6 Mar 2017 17:42:26 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28575126C
 for <freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Mon,  6 Mar 2017 17:42:26 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118])
 by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v26HgPMq001189
 for <freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org>; Mon, 6 Mar 2017 17:42:26 GMT
 (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org)
From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Bug 217532] sbin/newfs_nandfs/newfs_nandfs.c warning on unaligned
 pointer value
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 17:42:25 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System
X-Bugzilla-Component: bin
X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: patch
X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People
X-Bugzilla-Who: brooks@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: Closed
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: ---
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-217532-8-lNY6wBQtUR@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-217532-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-217532-8@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bug reports <freebsd-bugs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-bugs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs>,
 <mailto:freebsd-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 17:42:26 -0000

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D217532

Brooks Davis <brooks@FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |brooks@FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #6 from Brooks Davis <brooks@FreeBSD.org> ---
It's probably not important in practice, but the memcpy() is probably safer=
 as
I don't think that struct assignment is defined in C for misaligned structu=
res.
 At the very least, it would be a compiler bug in the memcpy() didn't work,=
 but
might be an "optimization" if you took a (potentially unhandled) unhandled
alignment fault in the assignment.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=