From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 12:22:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <28665.1165234964@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061204114851.GA25859@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> the question is: which is more important, the type safety of a
> container_of() [or type cast], which if we get it wrong produces a
> /very/ trivial crash that is trivial to fix - or embedded timers data
> structure size all around the kernel? I believe the latter is more
> important.
Indeed yes.
Using container_of() and ditching the data value, you generally have to have
one extra instruction per timer handler, if that, but you are able to discard
one instruction or more from __run_timers() and struct timer_list discards a
word.
You will almost certainly have far more timer_list structs in the kernel than
timer handler functions, therefore it's a space win, and possibly also a time
win (if the reduction of __run_timers() is greater than the increase in the
timer handler).
And that extra instruction in the timer handler is usually going to be an
addition or subtraction of a small immediate value - which may be zero (in
which case the insn is dropped) or which may be folded directly into memory
access instruction offsets.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-04 12:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-01 17:21 [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety Al Viro
2006-12-02 6:29 ` Daniel Berlin
2006-12-02 12:36 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 9:23 ` Kyle Moffett
2006-12-02 12:42 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 20:53 ` Kyle Moffett
2006-12-02 10:47 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-12-02 12:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-12-02 14:05 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 14:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-12-02 16:02 ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-12-02 18:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-12-02 18:19 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 18:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-12-02 18:40 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 18:48 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 21:43 ` Roman Zippel
2006-12-02 21:59 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 22:13 ` Roman Zippel
2006-12-02 22:40 ` Al Viro
2006-12-02 23:06 ` Roman Zippel
2006-12-03 10:21 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-03 11:27 ` Russell King
2006-12-03 15:21 ` Roman Zippel
2006-12-03 21:01 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-03 22:52 ` Roman Zippel
2006-12-03 23:15 ` Pavel Machek
2006-12-04 11:14 ` David Howells
2006-12-04 12:16 ` Russell King
2006-12-04 13:03 ` David Howells
2006-12-04 13:29 ` Russell King
2006-12-04 14:17 ` David Howells
2006-12-04 14:22 ` Russell King
2006-12-04 11:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-12-04 12:22 ` David Howells [this message]
2006-12-06 0:24 ` Al Viro
2006-12-06 10:20 ` David Howells
2006-12-12 9:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-12-02 21:32 ` Roman Zippel
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=28665.1165234964@redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
/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