Gregory Price <gregory.price@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> >> > struct mpol_args {
>> >> > /* Basic mempolicy settings */
>> >> > __u16 mode;
>> >> > __u16 mode_flags;
>> >> > __s32 home_node;
>> >> > __u64 pol_maxnodes;
>> >>
>> >> I understand that we want to avoid hole in struct. But I still feel
>> >> uncomfortable to use __u64 for a small. But I don't have solution too.
>> >> Anyone else has some idea?
>> >>
>> >
>> > maxnode has been an `unsigned long` in every other interface for quite
>> > some time. Seems better to keep this consistent rather than it suddenly
>> > become `unsigned long` over here and `unsigned short` over there.
>>
>> I don't think that it matters. The actual maximum node number will be
>> less than maximum `unsigned short`.
>>
>
> the structure will end up being
>
> struct mpol_args {
> __u16 mode;
> __u16 mode_flags;
> __s32 home_node;
> __u16 pol_maxnodes;
> __u8 rsv[6];
> __aligned_u64 pol_nodes;
> __aligned_u64 il_weights;
> }
>
> If you're fine with that, i'll make the change.
This looks OK for me. But, I don't know whether others think this is
better.
--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
