Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-91167-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 21:18:27 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@gmail.com>
Cc: jic23@kernel.org, lars@metafoo.de, ang.iglesiasg@gmail.com,
	mazziesaccount@gmail.com, ak@it-klinger.de,
	petre.rodan@subdimension.ro, phil@raspberrypi.com, 579lpy@gmail.com,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] iio: pressure: Add triggered buffer support for
 BMP280 driver
Message-ID: <ZeYegxEF521ixMTs@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240303165300.468011-1-vassilisamir@gmail.com>
 <20240303165300.468011-5-vassilisamir@gmail.com>
 <ZeW15Q2juyQuTw5q@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20240304190838.GA4431@vamoiridPC>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240304190838.GA4431@vamoiridPC>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 08:08:38PM +0100, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 01:52:05PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 05:53:00PM +0100, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote:

..

> > > +	struct {
> > > +		s32 temperature;
> > > +		u32 pressure;
> > > +		u32 humidity;
> > 
> > > +		s64 timestamp;
> > 
> > Shouldn't this be aligned properly?
> 
> I saw that in some drivers it was added and in some it was not. What is the
> difference of aligning just the timestamp of the kernel?

You can count yourself. With provided structure as above there is a high
probability of misaligned timeout field. The latter has to be aligned on
8 bytes.

> > > +	} iio_buffer;

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko