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    [W:0.022 / U:119.720 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site