From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joe Perches Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: make ata_port_operations const Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 09:34:12 -0700 Message-ID: <1502123652.2219.24.camel@perches.com> References: <1502101922-13313-1-git-send-email-bhumirks@gmail.com> <20170807150727.GD4050379@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> <20170807162920.GA537256@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtprelay0050.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.50]:47903 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751426AbdHGQeP (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:34:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20170807162920.GA537256@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo , Bhumika Goyal Cc: Julia Lawall , b.zolnierkie@samsung.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 09:29 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 08:54:21PM +0530, Bhumika Goyal wrote: > > I compiled the .o files and checked the size before and after > > compilation. After making the structure const, bytes should move from > > data to text segment of the memory and this is what happened. So, this > > is how I tested it. > > Ah, I see, so the port_operations is never used directly. I'm not > sure whether it'd be a good idea to selectively pick these and makr > them const. Let's just leave them be. Why? Things that are never accessed as other than const should be const no? Why leave unnecessary exposure for muckery?