Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 12 Oct 2001 15:34:33 -0500 (CDT) | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | RE: crc32 cleanups |
| |
On Fri, 12 Oct 2001 Matt_Domsch@Dell.com wrote: > > That leaves (a) unconditionally building > > it into the kernel, or (b) Makefile and Config.in rules. > > (a) is simple, but needs a 1KB malloc (or alternately, a 1KB static const > array - I've taken the approach that the malloc is better) > (b) isn't that much harder, but requires drivers to be sure to call > init_crc32 and cleanup_crc32. If somehow they manage not to do that, Oops. > I don't want to add a runtime check for the existance of the array in > crc32().
You are talking about the data; I was talking about the code.
I do not think kernels need the data table, kmalloc'd or statically built, unless it will be used. That implies a refcounting scheme. [WRT "Oops", that is a driver bug, not a case to be considered. In Linuxland we do not write code to protect us from rogue code.]
I was pondering whether it was ok to unconditionally include the lib/crc32.c code, regardless of need. I am leaning towards "no," which implies Makefile and Config.in rules which must be updated for each driver that uses crc32.
Jeff
- 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/
|  |