![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
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] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||