Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <1522936292.11185.15.camel@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Ethernet: Add and use ether_<type>_addr globals
From:   Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To:     Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, b43-dev@lists.infradead.org,
        bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        coreteam@netfilter.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com,
        brcm80211-dev-list@cypress.com
Date:   Thu, 05 Apr 2018 06:51:32 -0700
In-Reply-To: <e0ab9616-64fa-cdbc-7a77-7e25d70c1a52@nbd.name>
References: <cover.1522479607.git.joe@perches.com>
         <e0ab9616-64fa-cdbc-7a77-7e25d70c1a52@nbd.name>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 15:27 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> On 2018-03-31 09:05, Joe Perches wrote:
> > There are many local static and non-static arrays that are used for
> > Ethernet broadcast address output or comparison.
> > 
> > Centralize the array into a single separate file and remove the local
> > arrays.
> 
> I suspect that for many targets and configurations, the local arrays
> might actually be smaller than exporting a global.

I tried x86-64 allnoconfig and defconfig.
Those both did not increase vmlinux size.

The defconfig actually got smaller, but that might have been
some object alignment oddity.

>  You have to factor in
> not just the .text size, but the fact that referencing an exported
> symbol needs a .reloc entry as well, which also eats up some space (at
> least when the code is being built as module).

Thanks, the modules I built got smaller.

> In my opinion, your series probably causes more bloat in common
> configurations instead of reducing it.
> 
> You're also touching several places that could easily use
> eth_broadcast_addr and eth_zero_addr. I think making those changes would
> be more productive than what you did in this series.

Doubtful. AFAIK: possible unaligned addresses.