Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:17:22 +0000 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Driver Core update for 2.6.4 |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: > > eh? If there is any argument against this code it is that it is so simple > > that the thing which it abstracts is not worth abstracting. But given that > > it is so unwasteful, this seems unimportant. > > The bloat argument was about the additional pointer in the dynamic > data structure (on a 64bit architecture it costs 12 bytes)
This is one place where C++-style vtable inheritance would help. Many of those *_operations tables could logically derive from a kref_operations table.
I doubt if there is a nice to way to represent it with C macros, but maybe there is.
-- Jamie - 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/
| |