Re: [PATCH] Driver Core update for 2.6.4

[Jamie Lokier]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/