Aaron Bannert wrote: > I don't think there's a problem right now, but if the size of the > global_score or process_score changed by any non-multiple of the pointer > alignment then we'd have problems. Same if we tried to stuff anything else > in the shared mem segment behind the worker_score array. Seems like to > be safe we should pad out those sizes. How does the attached patch look?
Looks correct in concept. Greg
