Hi, resurrecting this thread because I think there's no reason ofono should not build on cpus with strict alignment rules, the netlink code is actually aligned correctly. These warnings are a result of -Wcast-align, the compiler can't know that the casts in the macros are safe, but they obviously are if you look at the arithmetics there. In the case of the netlink warnings they can be turned off for all users of <linux/netlink.h> using a pragma or only for this cast by casting to void * first (the only way according to gcc people), the first attached file adds them (against linux), I'll send it to linux if there's no better idea. There are also similar warnings when casting struct sockaddr_pn * to struct sockaddr * and these can be worked around in ofono, see second patch, but probably should also be in linux's include/linux/phonet.h instead.

2009/11/9 Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi(a)remlab.net&gt;: > Le lundi 9 novembre 2009 17:45:25 andrzej zaborowski, vous avez écrit : >> Hi, >> resurrecting this thread because I think there's no reason ofono >> should not build on cpus with strict alignment rules, the netlink code >> is actually aligned correctly. These warnings are a result of >> -Wcast-align, the compiler can't know that the casts in the macros are >> safe, but they obviously are if you look at the arithmetics there. In >> the case of the netlink warnings they can be turned off for all users >> of <linux/netlink.h> using a pragma or only for this cast by casting >> to void * first (the only way according to gcc people), the first >> attached file adds them (against linux), I'll send it to linux if >> there's no better idea. There are also similar warnings when casting >> struct sockaddr_pn * to struct sockaddr * and these can be worked >> around in ofono, see second patch, but probably should also be in >> linux's include/linux/phonet.h instead. > > Why do you change the sockaddr_pn type name?! Because it's been defined without explicit alignment and I don't think you can redefine it with the same name?

2009/11/9 Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi(a)remlab.net&gt;: > As far as I know NO extra alignement is needed. The kernel will anyway > memory copy from/to the sockaddr_pn buffer as part of the socket calls, > so it couldn't care less about alignment. Practically I'm sure you're right and maybe we should stick a (void *) cast in between the casts or disable the warning. Formally that memcpy is an implementation detail and could be true in one kernel version and false in the next version, so when you pass a struct sockaddr * to a function it should, in theory be aligned as such.