From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] remove CONFIG_IDE_MAX_HWIFS
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:45:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807292145.21681.bzolnier@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080729164801.GB23951@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi>
On Tuesday 29 July 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 04:32:16PM +0200, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Sunday 27 July 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >...
> > > <-- snip -->
> > >
> > > Considering the little benefits of all this fiddling with IDE_MAX_HWIFS
> > > I decided to fix it through a simplification:
> > > - always #define MAX_HWIFS CONFIG_IDE_MAX_HWIFS
> > > - always set CONFIG_IDE_MAX_HWIFS in kconfig
> > > - let IDE_MAX_HWIFS default to 10
> > > - allow changing the value of IDE_MAX_HWIFS only if IDE && EMBEDDED
> >
> > I was actually wondering whether it is worth to keep IDE_MAX_HWIFS
> > now that ide_hwif_t instances are allocated dynamically.
> >
> > [ The difference between MAX_HWIFS == 10 and MAX_HWIFS == 2 is now
> > ~100 bytes (x86_32) and between MAX_HWIFS == 10 and MAX_HWIFS == 1
> > it is ~1kb (IIRC). ]
> >
> > Since there were also many other improvements in shrinking drivers/ide/
> > code size which should keep embedded users happy and compensate for
> > the above 1kB-worst-case I would prefer to have IDE_MAX_HWIFS removed
> > completely.
> >...
>
> Patch below.
applied
Thanks Adrian!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-29 19:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-27 13:04 [2.6 patch] simplify MAX_HWIFS setting Adrian Bunk
2008-07-27 14:32 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-07-29 16:48 ` [2.6 patch] remove CONFIG_IDE_MAX_HWIFS Adrian Bunk
2008-07-29 19:45 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2008-07-29 16:48 ` [2.6 patch] remove unneeded #include <linux/ide.h>'s Adrian Bunk
2008-07-29 19:43 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200807292145.21681.bzolnier@gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).