On Tuesday 03 December 2013, Frank Haverkamp wrote:
> Ohh, sorry __u64 of course:
>
> /* common struct for chip image exchange */
> struct genwqe_bitstream {
> __u64 data_addr; /* pointer to image data */
> __u32 size; /* size of image file */
> __u32 crc; /* crc of this image */
> __u8 partition; /* '0', '1', or 'v' */
> __u64 target_addr; /* starting address in Flash */
> __u8 uid; /* 1=host/x=dram */
>
> __u64 slu_id; /* informational/sim: SluID */
> __u64 app_id; /* informational/sim: AppID */
>
> __u16 retc; /* returned from processing */
> __u16 attn; /* attention code from
> processing */
> __u32 progress; /* progress code from processing
> */
> };
>
> and than I do in my userspace application:
>
> load.data_addr = (unsigned long)buf;
>
> Is that ok, or must I consider more?
>
I haven't followed the recent discussions, jumping into the middle here:
The structure above is not safe for a generic ioctl interface because it
has different padding on x86-32 and x86-64, where __u64 has different
alignment.
You can try to avoid the implicit padding by sorting the members by size,
by making some members larger or by adding explicit padding.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
