[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
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 -
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-11-01 08:55    [W:0.173 / U:4.048 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site