From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: len.brown@intel.com, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Deepthi Dharwar <deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Robert Lee <rob.lee@linaro.org>,
hpa@linux.intel.com, amit.kucheria@linaro.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pm: remove useless array definition in cpuidle_structure
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:59:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EB82A77.3080804@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201111042328.43358.rjw@sisk.pl>
On 11/04/2011 11:28 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Len, Arjan,
>
> On Friday, November 04, 2011, Deepthi Dharwar wrote:
>> On Friday 04 November 2011 03:14 AM, Robert Lee wrote:
>>> From: Daniel Lezcano<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> All the modules name are ro-data, it is never copied to the array.
>>>
>>> eg.
>>>
>>> static struct cpuidle_driver intel_idle_driver = {
>>> .name = "intel_idle",
>>> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>> };
>>>
>>> It safe to assign the pointer of this ro-data to a const char *.
>>> By this way we save 12 bytes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Robert Lee<rob.lee@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/cpuidle.h | 4 ++--
>>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/cpuidle.h b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
>>> index b51629e..16f9dce 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/cpuidle.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
>>> @@ -117,8 +117,8 @@ static inline int cpuidle_get_last_residency(struct cpuidle_device *dev)
>>> ****************************/
>>>
>>> struct cpuidle_driver {
>>> - char name[CPUIDLE_NAME_LEN];
>>> - struct module *owner;
>>> + const char *name;
>>> + struct module *owner;
>>> };
>>>
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_IDLE
>>
>> This looks good, and makes it fool-proof by not allowing one to tamper the name of the driver.
>> Tested OK on x86 (both Intel idle and ACPI)
>>
>> Tested-by: Deepthi Dharwar<deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Deepthi Dharwar<deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> This is simple enough for me to push it for 3.2, but I woulnd't like to
> step on anyone's toes. Please let me know what you think.
>
> Rafael
Hi Len,
are you willing to take this patch for 3.2 ?
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-07 18:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-03 21:44 [PATCH] pm: remove useless array definition in cpuidle_structure Robert Lee
2011-11-04 12:21 ` Deepthi Dharwar
2011-11-04 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-11-07 18:59 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
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=4EB82A77.3080804@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=amit.kucheria@linaro.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=deepthi@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=rob.lee@linaro.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