Re: [PATCH] superblock endianess annotations

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 10:24:32AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > +} xfs_dsb_t;
> 
> Should this be packed so we don't reintroduce have the problem we currently
> do with 32-vs-64-bit alignment of the last field(s) in the structure?

There's no packing for the xfs_sb_t, so there's none in xfs_dsb_t
aswell.  If you introduce packing for xfs_sb_t make sure to patch
xfs_dsb_t aswell.

Should we change names to xfs_sb_t for the ondisk one an xfs_icsb_t
here aswell?  That would be a quite large change as there are a lot
more incore instances of the superblock than ondisk.