On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 10:23:27AM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > Do we need to keep this comment that tied to an userspace tool? It think it is a pretty good reminder why it is here. > The issue with randholes is that it uses posix_memalign, and the pointer > size constraint comes from that. > > I couldn't find any details on why this is required, but I'm assuming > it's to keep posix_memalign architecture/implementation independent?! > > So, perhaps instead of being 'randholes' specific, it should specify to > be posix compliant or because posix requires this way? Posix does not require the alignment to be larger than void *. Applications that directly feed the value to posix_memalign do. And maybe that what could go into the comment.
