5.5.a. Appropriate care shall be taken to prevent the compiler from inserting padding bytes within struct or union types used to communicate to or from a peripheral or over a bus or network to another processor.

5.5.b. Appropriate care shall be taken to prevent the compiler from altering the intended order of the bits within bit-fields.


typedef struct
    uint16_t  count;             // offset 0	
    uint16_t  max_count;         // offset 2	
    uint16_t  _unused;		 // offset 4	

    uint16_t  enable	  : 2;   // offset 6 bits 15-14
    uint16_t  b_interrupt : 1;   // offset 6 bit  13
    uint16_t  _unused1	  : 7;   // offset 6 bits 12-6
    uint16_t  b_complete  : 1;   // offset 6 bit  5
    uint16_t  _unused2	  : 4;   // offset 6 bits 4-1
    uint16_t  b_periodic  : 1;   // offset 6 bit  0

} timer_reg_t;

// Preprocessor check of timer register layout byte count.
#if ((8 != sizeof(timer_reg_t))
#   error “timer_reg_t struct size incorrect (expected 8 bytes)”

Reasoning: Owing to differences across processor families and loose definitions in the ISO C language standards, there is a tremendous amount of implementation- defined behavior in the area of structures and unions. Bit-fields, in particular, suffer from severe portability problems, including the lack of a standard bit ordering and no official support for the fixed-width integer types they so often call out to be used with. The methods available to check the layout of such data structures include static assertions or other compile-time checks as well as the use of preprocessor directives, e.g., to select one of two competing struct layouts based on the compiler.

Enforcement: These rules shall be enforced during code reviews.