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