On 01/07/2011 07:33 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 01/07/2011 06:52 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>>> No, it's not the same issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> On x86 as described on your link, it's just a performance penalty
if
>>>>> your members are not aligned. On ARM without fixup, you read actual
>>>>> garbage as described on my article.
>>>>
>>>> Yup, I was more referring to the data not aligning when unioning
>>>
>>> That's nothing to do with this issue.
>>>
>>> With this issue, a correct structure in a typedef or a struct with
>>> correct alignment padding turns to crap because the structure pointed to
>>> is not on a u32 boundary for example.
>>
>> I see. But shouldn't the compiler be taking care of that? -malign?
>
> The compiler will always take care of that, unless someone does
> something really evil in either the code or the gcc options.
s/will/should/ and I might agree. :)
LOL! Well, I am a gcc maintainer, so I have my own opinion about that!
:)
In any case, I'm happy to bet this is a library bug, not a gcc bug.
Andrew.