On Mon, 11 Oct 2021, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > It's not clear either from this patch description or from the commit > > referred what the actual *purpose* of the alignment check is and therefore > > I think it's hard to say which of the two commits needs to be indicated as > > the offender. Without further data I tend to agree it's 79edff12060f that > > ought to be referred, being the immediate cause of the regression, as > > things obviously worked before, for 5+ years. > > This patch was already taken. Do I need to do any thing? No, unless Thomas chimes in, especially since you've posted v2 already (I hope he's sorted the stable part). Overall we need better change descriptions though. Maciej
