From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758456AbbIVQja (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 12:39:30 -0400 Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.160]:55484 "EHLO e39.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758330AbbIVQj3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2015 12:39:29 -0400 X-Helo: d03dlp01.boulder.ibm.com X-MailFrom: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-RcptTo: linux-next@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 09:39:22 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Hans-Peter Nilsson Cc: kirill@shutemov.name, 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: <20150922163922.GV4029@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20150922153104.GA19024@node.dhcp.inet.fi> <201509221616.t8MGGIrW017239@ignucius.se.axis.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201509221616.t8MGGIrW017239@ignucius.se.axis.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15092216-0033-0000-0000-000005FA2A5D Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 06:16:18PM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > > 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! ;) What Hans-Peter said! ;-) Thanx, Paul