On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 12:37:53PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 03:17:44PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: [...] [extra_context.size] > > I'd rather have the time size_t or __u64 to avoid implicit padding. > > Sure, it can be a u64. I wanted to avoid the suggestion that the frame > should be that large, but 32 bits already allows it to be crazy large > anyway, so I don't think making it 32-bit helps. Actually, there is still implicit padding even with u64, since the total size is 16 bytes + sizeof(extra_context.size). Since u64 is much bigger then we'd ever want, and to avoid introducing new bugs, do you object to keeping size as u32 and adding explicit padding instead? Cheers ---Dave
