From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264068AbUCPQrI (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:47:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263120AbUCPQma (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:42:30 -0500 Received: from zero.aec.at ([193.170.194.10]:11527 "EHLO zero.aec.at") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264029AbUCPQf7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:35:59 -0500 To: Andrew Morton cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Driver Core update for 2.6.4 References: <1AajM-5vw-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <1Abpq-6Av-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <1Aj3K-5Fn-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <1AjwZ-65D-15@gated-at.bofh.it> From: Andi Kleen Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:14:47 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1AjwZ-65D-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (Andrew Morton's message of "Tue, 16 Mar 2004 11:00:25 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton writes: > > 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) Better would be to pass the callback to kref_put(), but then it would be even better to just test the return value (callbacks are obfuscation and should be avoided when not needed) -Andi