From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933717AbbIVQQ0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 12:16:26 -0400 Received: from bastet.se.axis.com ([195.60.68.11]:36300 "EHLO bastet.se.axis.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933247AbbIVQQY (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 12:16:24 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:16:18 +0200 Message-Id: <201509221616.t8MGGIrW017239@ignucius.se.axis.com> From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: kirill@shutemov.name CC: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, starvik@axis.com, linux@roeck-us.net, jespern@axis.com, hughd@google.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, minchan@kernel.org, linux-cris-kernel@axis.com In-reply-to: <20150922153104.GA19024@node.dhcp.inet.fi> (kirill@shutemov.name) Subject: Re: crisv32 runtime failure in -next due to 'page-flags: define behavior SL*B-related flags on compound pages' MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" > 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