On 05/14/12 09:41 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/int10/xf86int10.h b/hw/xfree86/int10/xf86int10.h
> index 36b659f..443285b 100644
> --- a/hw/xfree86/int10/xf86int10.h
> +++ b/hw/xfree86/int10/xf86int10.h
> @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
> /* int10 info structure */
> typedef struct {
> int entityIndex;
> - int scrnIndex;
> + ScrnInfoPtr pScrn;
> pointer cpuRegs;
> CARD16 BIOSseg;
> CARD16 inb40time;
As long as the struct offsets are breaking anyway, would it make sense to move
the CARD16's up before pScrn instead of letting LP64 compilers stuff 32-bits
of padding there to get the alignment right for the pointer? (Similar to
ajax's re-padding patch series from a few months back.)
I suppose that actually breaks 32-bit ABI that would otherwise sneak through
due to the sizeof int & pointer being the same though.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [email protected]
Oracle Solaris Engineering - http://blogs.oracle.com/alanc
_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
