Taking the address of a field in a packed struct is a bad idea, because
it might not be actually aligned enough for that pointer type (and
thus cause a crash on dereference on some host architectures). Newer
versions of clang warn about this:
migration/ram.c:651:19: warning: taking address of packed member 'magic' of class or structure 'MultiFDInit_t' may result in an unaligned pointer value [-Waddress-of-packed-member]
migration/ram.c:652:19: warning: taking address of packed member 'version' of class or structure 'MultiFDInit_t' may result in an unaligned pointer value [-Waddress-of-packed-member]
migration/ram.c:737:19: warning: taking address of packed member 'magic' of class or structure 'MultiFDPacket_t' may result in an unaligned pointer value [-Waddress-of-packed-member]
migration/ram.c:745:19: warning: taking address of packed member 'version' of class or structure 'MultiFDPacket_t' may result in an unaligned pointer value [-Waddress-of-packed-member]
migration/ram.c:755:19: warning: taking address of packed member 'size' of class or structure 'MultiFDPacket_t' may result in an unaligned pointer value [-Waddress-of-packed-member]
Avoid the bug by not using the "modify in place" byteswapping
functions.
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Message-Id: <20180925161924.7832-1-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>
341ba0df4c