From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:02:46 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v2 02/15] usb: gadget: make config_item_type structures const In-Reply-To: <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> References: <1508167134-6243-1-git-send-email-bhumirks@gmail.com> <1985905.z83BJQzMUS@avalon> <20171019140657.GA22233@lst.de> <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> Message-ID: List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Thursday, 19 October 2017 17:06:57 EEST Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Now we have 9 const instances of the config_item_type structure that are > > > identical, with only the .ct_owner field set. Should they be all merged > > > into a single structure ? > > > > I think that's a good idea. > > > > But I'm about to slurp up this whole series into my tree, how about making > > that an incremental patch? > > I'm fine with that. > > Bhumika, would you like to submit an incremental patch, or should I do it ? For various types, there seem to be a few hundred of these, eg: static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_playback = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_capture = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; Would it be desirable to remove them? I guess one would have to check that there are not any pointer equality checks on these values. Would it be useful to put a #define to keep the orignal names? julia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/15] usb: gadget: make config_item_type structures const Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:02:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <1508167134-6243-1-git-send-email-bhumirks@gmail.com> <1985905.z83BJQzMUS@avalon> <20171019140657.GA22233@lst.de> <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> Sender: linux-iio-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Bhumika Goyal , julia.lawall-L2FTfq7BK8M@public.gmane.org, rjw-LthD3rsA81gm4RdzfppkhA@public.gmane.org, lenb-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, alexander.shishkin-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, jic23-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, knaack.h-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org, lars-Qo5EllUWu/uELgA04lAiVw@public.gmane.org, pmeerw-jW+XmwGofnusTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org, dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, hal.rosenstock-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, sagi-NQWnxTmZq1alnMjI0IkVqw@public.gmane.org, kishon-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org, bhelgaas-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, nab-IzHhD5pYlfBP7FQvKIMDCQ@public.gmane.org, balbi-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, jlbec-aKy9MeLSZ9dg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, ccaulfie-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, teigland-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mfasheh-rOS7oXVqrJRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-iio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-nvme-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, target-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Thursday, 19 October 2017 17:06:57 EEST Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Now we have 9 const instances of the config_item_type structure that are > > > identical, with only the .ct_owner field set. Should they be all merged > > > into a single structure ? > > > > I think that's a good idea. > > > > But I'm about to slurp up this whole series into my tree, how about making > > that an incremental patch? > > I'm fine with that. > > Bhumika, would you like to submit an incremental patch, or should I do it ? For various types, there seem to be a few hundred of these, eg: static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_playback = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_capture = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; Would it be desirable to remove them? I guess one would have to check that there are not any pointer equality checks on these values. Would it be useful to put a #define to keep the orignal names? julia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:02:46 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall To: Laurent Pinchart cc: Christoph Hellwig , Bhumika Goyal , julia.lawall@lip6.fr, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, jic23@kernel.org, knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net, dledford@redhat.com, sean.hefty@intel.com, hal.rosenstock@gmail.com, sagi@grimberg.me, kishon@ti.com, bhelgaas@google.com, nab@linux-iscsi.org, balbi@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jlbec@evilplan.org, ccaulfie@redhat.com, teigland@redhat.com, mfasheh@versity.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, cluster-devel@redhat.com, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/15] usb: gadget: make config_item_type structures const In-Reply-To: <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> Message-ID: References: <1508167134-6243-1-git-send-email-bhumirks@gmail.com> <1985905.z83BJQzMUS@avalon> <20171019140657.GA22233@lst.de> <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-ID: On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Thursday, 19 October 2017 17:06:57 EEST Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Now we have 9 const instances of the config_item_type structure that are > > > identical, with only the .ct_owner field set. Should they be all merged > > > into a single structure ? > > > > I think that's a good idea. > > > > But I'm about to slurp up this whole series into my tree, how about making > > that an incremental patch? > > I'm fine with that. > > Bhumika, would you like to submit an incremental patch, or should I do it ? For various types, there seem to be a few hundred of these, eg: static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_playback = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_capture = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; Would it be desirable to remove them? I guess one would have to check that there are not any pointer equality checks on these values. Would it be useful to put a #define to keep the orignal names? julia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 08:02:46 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/15] usb: gadget: make config_item_type structures const Message-Id: List-Id: References: <1508167134-6243-1-git-send-email-bhumirks@gmail.com> <1985905.z83BJQzMUS@avalon> <20171019140657.GA22233@lst.de> <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> In-Reply-To: <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Bhumika Goyal , julia.lawall-L2FTfq7BK8M@public.gmane.org, rjw-LthD3rsA81gm4RdzfppkhA@public.gmane.org, lenb-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, alexander.shishkin-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, jic23-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, knaack.h-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org, lars-Qo5EllUWu/uELgA04lAiVw@public.gmane.org, pmeerw-jW+XmwGofnusTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org, dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, hal.rosenstock-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, sagi-NQWnxTmZq1alnMjI0IkVqw@public.gmane.org, kishon-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org, bhelgaas-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, nab-IzHhD5pYlfBP7FQvKIMDCQ@public.gmane.org, balbi-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, jlbec-aKy9MeLSZ9dg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, ccaulfie-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, teigland-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mfasheh-rOS7oXVqrJRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-iio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-nvme-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, target-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Thursday, 19 October 2017 17:06:57 EEST Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Now we have 9 const instances of the config_item_type structure that are > > > identical, with only the .ct_owner field set. Should they be all merged > > > into a single structure ? > > > > I think that's a good idea. > > > > But I'm about to slurp up this whole series into my tree, how about making > > that an incremental patch? > > I'm fine with that. > > Bhumika, would you like to submit an incremental patch, or should I do it ? For various types, there seem to be a few hundred of these, eg: static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_playback = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_capture = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; Would it be desirable to remove them? I guess one would have to check that there are not any pointer equality checks on these values. Would it be useful to put a #define to keep the orignal names? julia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/15] usb: gadget: make config_item_type structures const Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 10:02:46 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <1508167134-6243-1-git-send-email-bhumirks@gmail.com> <1985905.z83BJQzMUS@avalon> <20171019140657.GA22233@lst.de> <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Bhumika Goyal , julia.lawall-L2FTfq7BK8M@public.gmane.org, rjw-LthD3rsA81gm4RdzfppkhA@public.gmane.org, lenb-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, alexander.shishkin-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org, jic23-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, knaack.h-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org, lars-Qo5EllUWu/uELgA04lAiVw@public.gmane.org, pmeerw-jW+XmwGofnusTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org, dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, hal.rosenstock-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, sagi-NQWnxTmZq1alnMjI0IkVqw@public.gmane.org, kishon-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org, bhelgaas-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, nab-IzHhD5pYlfBP7FQvKIMDCQ@public.gmane.org, balbi-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, jlbec-aKy9MeLSZ9dg9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, ccaulfie-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, teigland-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, mfasheh-rOS7oXVqrJRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-iio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-nvme-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-scsi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, target-devel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, To: Laurent Pinchart Return-path: In-Reply-To: <6348630.r2z9ev4yl2@avalon> Sender: linux-iio-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Thursday, 19 October 2017 17:06:57 EEST Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Now we have 9 const instances of the config_item_type structure that are > > > identical, with only the .ct_owner field set. Should they be all merged > > > into a single structure ? > > > > I think that's a good idea. > > > > But I'm about to slurp up this whole series into my tree, how about making > > that an incremental patch? > > I'm fine with that. > > Bhumika, would you like to submit an incremental patch, or should I do it ? For various types, there seem to be a few hundred of these, eg: static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_playback = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; static const struct hda_pcm_stream alc269_44k_pcm_analog_capture = { .rates = SNDRV_PCM_RATE_44100, /* fixed rate */ }; Would it be desirable to remove them? I guess one would have to check that there are not any pointer equality checks on these values. Would it be useful to put a #define to keep the orignal names? julia