lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-11-01 08:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans