From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] sata_sil: convert sil_port[] to u16 from unsigned long Date: Sun, 05 Mar 2006 10:50:20 -0500 Message-ID: <440B08BC.5090409@pobox.com> References: <1141542232248-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> <440A969A.5090503@pobox.com> <440A97CD.30404@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:3283 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932158AbWCEPuZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Mar 2006 10:50:25 -0500 In-Reply-To: <440A97CD.30404@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Carlos.Pardo@siliconimage.com, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo wrote: > Jeff Garzik wrote: > >> Tejun Heo wrote: >> >>> unsigned long is way too big for sil_port[] offsets (currently the >>> table is 256 bytes on 64bit machines). Convert sil_port[] to u16. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo >> >> >> >> NAK. This just forces the compiler to promote these from u16 to >> machine int (i.e. unsigned long) at addition time. Table size is a >> very trivial matter. >> > > Wouldn't that be cheaper than extra cache lines? I'm pretty sure it > would be on x86/64. Actually, when I got this reply, I looked at it again. sil_port[] is only used at startup, therefore performance is not an issue, and we don't care (within reason) how big the table is. So, I would rather leave it in native format (machine int -> unsigned long). Jeff