On Sat, 03 Sep 2016 00:44:02 +0200
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday, September 2, 2016 3:42:24 PM CEST Laura Abbott wrote:
> > - The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of
> > 64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains
> > no
On Sat, 03 Sep 2016 00:44:02 +0200
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday, September 2, 2016 3:42:24 PM CEST Laura Abbott wrote:
> > - The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of
> > 64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains
> > no 64-bit types.
On Friday, September 2, 2016 3:42:24 PM CEST Laura Abbott wrote:
> - The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of
> 64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains
> no 64-bit types. Clarify this concept to avoid unnecessary padding.
> - When using __u64
On Friday, September 2, 2016 3:42:24 PM CEST Laura Abbott wrote:
> - The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of
> 64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains
> no 64-bit types. Clarify this concept to avoid unnecessary padding.
> - When using __u64
- The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of
64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains
no 64-bit types. Clarify this concept to avoid unnecessary padding.
- When using __u64 to hold user pointers, blindly trying to do a cast to
a void __user *
- The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of
64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains
no 64-bit types. Clarify this concept to avoid unnecessary padding.
- When using __u64 to hold user pointers, blindly trying to do a cast to
a void __user *
6 matches
Mail list logo