On 12/15/18 3:13 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
>> may be a "union { __u32 offset; __u32 bitsize_offset; };"......
> The union with two __u32 is great idea. Maybe the
> bitsize_offset becomes "bitfield_size_offset" to reflect
> its real intention?I don't think union and verbose name will help. imo it's add confusion. I prefer to keep it as-is with simple 'offset' name.
