Re: [PATCH] Driver Core update for 2.6.4

Jamie Lokier
2004-03-19T09:17:31Z

Andi Kleen wrote:
> > eh? If there is any argument against this code it is that it is so simple
> > that the thing which it abstracts is not worth abstracting. But given that
> > it is so unwasteful, this seems unimportant.
>
> The bloat argument was about the additional pointer in the dynamic
> data structure (on a 64bit architecture it costs 12 bytes)

This is one place where C++-style vtable inheritance would help.
Many of those *_operations tables could logically derive from a kref_operations table.

I doubt if there is a nice to way to represent it with C macros, but
maybe there is.

-- Jamie