From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158] helo=orion.mvista.com) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.22 #5 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1AClhx-0002o1-Ar for ; Thu, 23 Oct 2003 21:05:21 +0100 Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 13:04:06 -0700 From: Jun Sun To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn_Engel?= Message-ID: <20031023130406.D1345@mvista.com> References: <20031022182558.U19834@mvista.com> <20031023153307.GA11669@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <20031023100304.B1070@mvista.com> <20031023173148.GC16160@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> <20031023104320.A1345@mvista.com> <20031023181541.GE16160@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031023181541.GE16160@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>; from joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de on Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 08:15:41PM +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] extend physmap.c to support run-time adding partitions List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 08:15:41PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Thu, 23 October 2003 10:43:20 -0700, Jun Sun wrote: > > > > > > o All those translate to improvements in the source code. How about the > > > binary? Compile with and without patch and post the kernel image > > > size. And remember that noone will use two map files at the same time > > > in the real world. > > > > > > o Copy and paste is simple. So simple in fact, that everyone does it, > > > as you have observed. Why make it more complicated, unless you have > > > clear advantages. > > > > ... as if my previous listings are not advantages. :) > > They are, no doubt. But there are disadvantages as well. > > > > Yes, I like the basic idea, tried to do it myself. But what's the use > > > if all your users care about binary size and that increases? > > > > I find it hard to belive this patch would increase kernel size. > > Can someone using existing propriatary mapping driver apply this > > patch, switch to use physmap.c, and let us know the size increase? > > > > How much increase would you start to really care in a typical .5M to 2M > > kernel? 1K or 10K or 100K? I think the increase should be minimum if any. > > I don't know and I don't care. You want the patch in, you show the > numbers or convince David otherwise. > I will do some numbers, but I don't really buy your logic. I said "This patch is great" and you are one who said it increases the size. It seems to me you need to prove your claim. :) Jun