Subject: Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reply-To: tglx@linutronix.de
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
       linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20061202160252.GQ14076@parisc-linux.org>
References: <20061201172149.GC3078@ftp.linux.org.uk>
	 <1165064370.24604.36.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20061202140521.GJ3078@ftp.linux.org.uk>
	 <1165070713.24604.50.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20061202160252.GQ14076@parisc-linux.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:06:43 +0100
Message-Id: <1165082803.24604.54.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1069
Lines: 31

On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 09:02 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:45:12PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > What's the cruft ? 
> > 
> > struct bla = container_of(timer, struct bla, timer); ???
> 
> That's it, right there.  Any idea how much we've bloated the kernel with
> sysfs, just by insisting that the struct device not be the first item in
> the struct?  There's any number of 2- and 3- line functions calling each
> other, each adding and subtracting constants from the pointers passed to
> them.  This was a huge mistake, IMO.

What a nonsense.

	foo->timer.data = foo;

is complete redundant information.

This is going to make a lot of data structures smaller, when the
timer_list is embedded in the structure itself and for the lot, which
ignores the timer callback argument anyway.

	tglx


-
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/