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