On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 16:45 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > On 09:27 Fri 14 Mar , Hal Rosenstock wrote: > > > > Yes but the field is present none the less (to pad out the structure to > > the full MAD size so we don't get into issues there again). > > ntc_144 is union field anyway, and there are no trailing padding in > other ntc_xxxx.
Guess I don't see how this could get us into trouble either way. -- Hal > Sasha > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general > > To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
