Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Nov 2005 07:52:29 +0000 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: New (now current development process) |
| |
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 04:13:22PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Are you sure these kernels are feature-equivalent? > > They may not be feature-equivalent in reality, but it's hard to generate > something that has the features (or lack there-of) of old kernels these > days. Which is problematic. > > But some of it is likely also compilers. gcc does insane padding in many > cases these days. > > And a lot of it is us just being bloated. Argh.
Which is one of the reasons I've started working on fixing up the platform device/driver stuff to conform to the "usual" method, with the view to killing off _all_ the function pointers in struct device_driver.
Most bus types wrap struct device_driver, and then provide their own function pointers which pass their bus-type specific device structure. This does two things: 1. it centralises the conversion from struct device to struct whatever_device, and 2. improves typechecking.
However, once the use of the function pointers in struct device_driver have been eliminated, we can be sure of reclaiming at least 20 bytes per device driver, maybe more if GCC does insane padding.
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |