Mais ca ne change pas grand-chose, il y a d'autres changements : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/52975/
Un ajout d'une ligne, une supression d'une autre, sachant que le changement prete quand même à confusion :
par exemple Also note that #pragma packed is not supported by older versions of gcc,
so I don't think that it would work at all on some compiler versions
that are still legal to use for the kernel. But I'm not quite sure when
it was added, so I might be wrong.
enfin, on constate comment microsoft comprend tout a faire ce qu'ils font : "on test. oh ca corrige. Bon on regardera après pourquoi ca corrige". Ils se sont fait tapez sur les doigts pour ça : > It is something that I want to look at in the future. Our primary focus
> Is to get the bug fixed. We cannot do the offset way in the time we
> Have before 2.6.32 closes and still be comfortable we have gone through
> The extensive testing cycle we do on our side.
We don't merge fixes to the kernel unless we understand _why_ they fix
things. It's pretty likely that the problem here is that one or more
of the structs you are putting under "#pragma pack" just need to be
annotated with "attribute packed".
Bon 3 jours après ils ont réussi a trouver et l'on indiqué, donc on peut pas dire non plus qu'ils sont de mauvaise foi, mais bon...
[^] # Re: Comme le module pour Hyper-V
Posté par briaeros007 . En réponse au journal la victoire de canard^Wde la GPL. Évalué à 3.
http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/52975/
Un ajout d'une ligne, une supression d'une autre, sachant que le changement prete quand même à confusion :
par exemple Also note that #pragma packed is not supported by older versions of gcc,
so I don't think that it would work at all on some compiler versions
that are still legal to use for the kernel. But I'm not quite sure when
it was added, so I might be wrong.
enfin, on constate comment microsoft comprend tout a faire ce qu'ils font : "on test. oh ca corrige. Bon on regardera après pourquoi ca corrige". Ils se sont fait tapez sur les doigts pour ça :
> It is something that I want to look at in the future. Our primary focus
> Is to get the bug fixed. We cannot do the offset way in the time we
> Have before 2.6.32 closes and still be comfortable we have gone through
> The extensive testing cycle we do on our side.
We don't merge fixes to the kernel unless we understand _why_ they fix
things. It's pretty likely that the problem here is that one or more
of the structs you are putting under "#pragma pack" just need to be
annotated with "attribute packed".
Bon 3 jours après ils ont réussi a trouver et l'on indiqué, donc on peut pas dire non plus qu'ils sont de mauvaise foi, mais bon...