[PATCH 6/6] xfs: pad xfs_attr_leaf_name_remote to avoid tripping on m68k

[Christoph Hellwig]

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.