Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 11:47:05 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Gisle Vanem <giva AT bgnett DOT no>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Inline asm: lcall & various binutils versions
Message-ID: <Pine.UW2.3.95.1000601114627.20424A-100000@bryggen.bgnett.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> said:
 
> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Richard Dawe wrote:
>
> > BTW the __dpmi_paddr structure isn't padded. None of the structures in
> > dpmi.h seem to be. I wonder if they should be, perhaps for DJGPP 2.04?
>
> What for?  What are the problems with them being unpadded?
>
> (Btw, nothing prevents the compiler from padding them at will, and I
> think it actually will do that.  Did you look at sizeof(__dpmi_paddr)?)
 
Padding wouldn't hurt. But I think he meant wrong alignment of
'__dpmi_paddr.selector'.  Without some #pragma's around '__dpmi_paddr',
the long-call *could* cause a crash.

Gisle V.