| To: | Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 6/6] xfs: pad xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote to avoid tripping on m68k |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 8 Mar 2016 09:34:43 -0800 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20160307162858.GE19784@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1457300990-18300-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1457300990-18300-7-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160307162858.GE19784@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) |
So I looked into this, and it seems we really don't care about the size - xfs_attr_leaf_entsize_remote pad it to the next multiple of 4 anyway. So I think we really should simply remove the size check here. Assuming all architectures pad up a structure that isn't word aligned the same way just isn't a sensible assumption. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 04/16] libxfs: rearrange xfs_bmap_add_free parameters, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [ANNOUNCE] xfs: for-next branch updated to ab9d1e4, Dave Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 6/6] xfs: pad xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote to avoid tripping on m68k, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH 3/6] xfs: fix computation of inode btree maxlevels, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |