Add compile assertions to enforce the sizes of all structs and enums in the C...

Add compile assertions to enforce the sizes of all structs and enums in the C API.  Adjust some structs to make their sizes consistent across architectures.  Note that some structs contain pointers, so are difficult to make consistent between 32-bit and 64-bit.  Those types are in test_struct_sizes.c.  Other types have a compile assertion immediately after their definition.

This was broken off from a bigger CL:
http://codereview.chromium.org/5340003/

BUG=61004, 92983
TEST=test_struct_sizes.c, compile assertions throughout

See this CL for the code that helped generate the static assertions and find affected interfaces:
http://codereview.chromium.org/5730003

Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=69038

[neb, 2010-12-11 01:02:12]

LGTM

On 2010/12/10 22:18:17, dmichael wrote:

[sehr (please use chromium), 2010-12-11 01:03:42]

LGTM here also.

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 5:02 PM, <neb@chromium.org> wrote:

> LGTM
>
>
> On 2010/12/10 22:18:17, dmichael wrote:
>
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/
>

[darin (slow to review), 2010-12-13 08:24:57]

http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/diff/1/ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h
File ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/diff/1/ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h#newc...
ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h:264: // In some 32-bit platforms (NaCl and Win32),
this struct is 8-byte aligned
Is this comment out-dated now that PP_Resource has changed from an int64_t to an
int32_t?

[dmichael(do not use this one), 2010-12-13 16:47:45]

On 2010/12/13 08:24:57, darin wrote:
> http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/diff/1/ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h
> File ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h (right):
> 
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/diff/1/ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h#newc...
> ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h:264: // In some 32-bit platforms (NaCl and Win32),
> this struct is 8-byte aligned
> Is this comment out-dated now that PP_Resource has changed from an int64_t to
an
> int32_t?
It appears to me that PP_Resource has not yet changed:
http://www.google.com/codesearch/p#OAMlx_jo-ck/src/ppapi/c/pp_resource.h
When it does, I (or whoever changes pp_resource.h) can re-run my tools I made
and it should take care of fixing up size checks appropriately.  At that time we
should also be able to take out at least this padding and associated comments,
and maybe other padding too.

Brett or Neb...  Any idea when PP_Resource will change?  Should I wait to land
this after, since that will affect so many structs?

[neb, 2010-12-13 18:16:23]

On 2010/12/13 16:47:45, dmichael wrote:
> On 2010/12/13 08:24:57, darin wrote:
> > http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/diff/1/ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h
> > File ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h (right):
> > 
> >
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/5674004/diff/1/ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h#newc...
> > ppapi/c/dev/pp_video_dev.h:264: // In some 32-bit platforms (NaCl and
Win32),
> > this struct is 8-byte aligned
> > Is this comment out-dated now that PP_Resource has changed from an int64_t
to
> an
> > int32_t?
> It appears to me that PP_Resource has not yet changed:
> http://www.google.com/codesearch/p#OAMlx_jo-ck/src/ppapi/c/pp_resource.h
> When it does, I (or whoever changes pp_resource.h) can re-run my tools I made
> and it should take care of fixing up size checks appropriately.  At that time
we
> should also be able to take out at least this padding and associated comments,
> and maybe other padding too.
> 
> Brett or Neb...  Any idea when PP_Resource will change?  Should I wait to land
> this after, since that will affect so many structs?


That'd be me. I am still waiting to land the resource management patch to NaCl
before I land the PP_Resource patch that Bill wrote. Until then, resources are
still 64 bit.