Return-path: Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.176]:38339 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751487AbXIAF6Q (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Sep 2007 01:58:16 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id u77so3852081pyb for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 22:58:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <40f31dec0708312258h1d77fc4eu54460bf70f119d27@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 08:58:15 +0300 From: "Nick Kossifidis" To: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Net: ath5k, kconfig changes Cc: "Christoph Hellwig" , "Jiri Slaby" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <40f31dec0708301518u5ef32d13jfe1cce09656bf77d@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 References: <2713029743177393055@pripojeni.net> <280951420471148977@pripojeni.net> <20070828171330.GD29343@infradead.org> <40f31dec0708291838p5d33eb34p3b4432d9d270841a@mail.gmail.com> <20070830123609.GA5140@tuxdriver.com> <40f31dec0708301518u5ef32d13jfe1cce09656bf77d@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2007/8/31, Nick Kossifidis : > 2007/8/30, John W. Linville : > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 04:38:09AM +0300, Nick Kossifidis wrote: > > > 2007/8/28, Christoph Hellwig : > > > > > > Also this whole patch seems rather pointless. It saves only > > > > very little and turns the driver into a complete ifdef maze. > > > > > Also most > > > people will use 5212 code only, 5211 cards are on some old laptops and > > > 5210, well i couldn't even find a 5210 for actual testing :P > > > > FWIW, I'd bet dollars to donuts that distros will enable them all > > together. > > > > Is saving code space the only reason to turn these off? How much > > space do you save? > > > > Is there some way you can isolate and/or limit the number of ifdef > > blocks further? If so, we might consider a version of this patch > > that depends on EMBEDDED or somesuch...? > > > > John > > O.K. as a first step i'll limit 5210 code only then, just an option > like "support older 5210 chipsets" which is going to be off by default > instead of 3 options. It's not just saving space, it's also saving > some runtime checks. It's not really a gain in performance though, > most checks are done during initialization and dfs setup, i just > thought it would be usefull to save as much cpu as possible. > Well after some thought i removed them all, there is no real gain from this in most cases (that ppl will use newer 5212 chips and combatibles). -- GPG ID: 0xD21DB2DB As you read this post global entropy rises. Have Fun ;-) Nick