[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201509221616.t8MGGIrW017239@ignucius.se.axis.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:16:18 +0200
From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter.nilsson@...s.com>
To: kirill@...temov.name
CC: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, starvik@...s.com, linux@...ck-us.net,
jespern@...s.com, hughd@...gle.com,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
minchan@...nel.org, linux-cris-kernel@...s.com
Subject: Re: crisv32 runtime failure in -next due to 'page-flags: define
behavior SL*B-related flags on compound pages'
> From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:31:04 +0200
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 08:18:35AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 03:57:06PM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > > I guess you hit the right spot, but I'd think people would be
> > > more comfortable with aligning to sizeof (void *).
> >
> > I would indeed prefer sizeof(void *).
>
> Do you prefer to have the attribute set for whole structure or for ->next?
> I think attribute on ->next is more appropriate from documentation POV.
Speaking of the documentation POV, I'd recommend adding an
explanatory comment. Here's hoping this was obvious! ;)
brgds, H-P
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists