From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933555AbbIVPk2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:40:28 -0400 Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.158]:45852 "EHLO e37.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933428AbbIVPkY (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 11:40:24 -0400 X-Helo: d03dlp03.boulder.ibm.com X-MailFrom: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-RcptTo: linux-next@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 08:40:14 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: Hans-Peter Nilsson , 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 Subject: Re: crisv32 runtime failure in -next due to 'page-flags: define behavior SL*B-related flags on compound pages' Message-ID: <20150922154014.GR4029@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20150922132751.GB17969@node.dhcp.inet.fi> <201509221357.t8MDv6G5015271@ignucius.se.axis.com> <20150922151835.GM4029@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150922153104.GA19024@node.dhcp.inet.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150922153104.GA19024@node.dhcp.inet.fi> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15092215-0025-0000-0000-00001D3D4CEF Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 06:31:04PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > 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. Agreed, I do prefer ->next. Thanx, Paul