public inbox for libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hayden Livingston <halivingston@gmail.com>
To: Jay <jay.krell@cornell.edu>
Cc: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>,
		"libffi-discuss@sourceware.org" <libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: does it matter how I construct an aggregate struct type if its size is the same?
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 22:16:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMxMwyKxCONEgw4Lo7w8VPicPnn+57D49YepEJYH-J2PrGD=kA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <063E0A50-A359-4F85-8DCF-AFD3B5504973@gmail.com>

Sorry, I should have been clearer -- I'm absolutely talking about
passing by value. But isn't it on a per argument basis and on its
size? If you have a data structure that is 9 bytes, after alignment
let's say it's 12, isn't that all that matters?

I mean I'm new to this but it seems that if you have a function
compiled by compiler 1, and let's say it is "exported", i.e. some body
else can call into this code via dlopen/loadlibrary you can't
arbitrarily decide how things should be passed right? It has to be on
an ABI-level, and the ABI I'm guessing says parameter 1 if it's size <
X can be passed on the stack, or use some registers, but does an ABI
also specify that struct member 1 if is less than X size can be passed
in register?

This would mean you have to use only 1 compiler.

While typing this email, a thought occurred to me that probably we
programmers know this, and therefore never make our public
dlopen/loadlibrary APIs take structs that are not completely opaque?

Sorry I'm formulating some of my thoughts .. but I'm new to this.

On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Jay <jay.krell@cornell.edu> wrote:
> Still beware of alignment.
>
>  - Jay
>
> On Dec 18, 2015, at 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/12/15 15:16, Hayden Livingston wrote:
>>> Thanks, Andrew. Where is this exception? In ABIs?
>>>
>>> So you're suggesting I use char's to construct my ffi_types?
>>
>> Well, it can be awkward.  Some targets pass the components of a
>> struct in registers.  But this only matters if you pass a struct
>> by value, which is a fairly unusual thing to do in C.  If you're
>> passing a struct by reference, then yes, you can just create a
>> char array of the right size.
>>
>> Andrew.
>>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-18 22:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-18  6:47 Hayden Livingston
2015-12-18  6:50 ` Hayden Livingston
2015-12-18 11:08 ` Andrew Haley
2015-12-18 15:16   ` Hayden Livingston
2015-12-18 20:04     ` Andrew Haley
2015-12-18 21:42       ` Jay
2015-12-18 22:16         ` Hayden Livingston [this message]
2015-12-18 22:24           ` Andrew Haley
2015-12-18 23:10             ` Hayden Livingston

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAMxMwyKxCONEgw4Lo7w8VPicPnn+57D49YepEJYH-J2PrGD=kA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=halivingston@gmail.com \
    --cc=aph@redhat.com \
    --cc=jay.krell@cornell.edu \
    --cc=libffi-discuss@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).