https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91043
--- Comment #21 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Hanoch Haim from comment #19)
> After some investigation, I think it is not a gcc issue, please verify.
> One of the internal object does not include a 64B alignment.
>
> #define __rte_cache_aligned __attribute__((__aligned__(64)));
>
> class CTimeHistogram {
>
> } __rte_cache_aligned;
>
>
> class CCPortLatency {
> public:
> CTimeHistogram m_hist;
> } __rte_cache_aligned; <<= without this, it is not aligned while the code
> generation assumed it is aligned !
>
> class Root {
>
> CCPortLatency port;
>
> } __rte_cache_aligned;
>
>
> Is it valid? why the code generation assumed the CCPortLatency is aligned
> because one of its internal is aligned?
Of course it does, because without aligning the container you cannot have
aligned members. Maximum alignment always propagates outwards.
