From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [PATCH] eliminate lock profile pointer from spinlock structure when !LOCK_PROFILE Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 13:14:44 +0100 Message-ID: References: <50211AEF0200007800093332@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <50211AEF0200007800093332@nat28.tlf.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 07/08/2012 12:41, "Jan Beulich" wrote: > This pointer is never used for anything, and needlessly increases the > memory footprint of various pieces of data. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Good catch. Acked-by: Keir Fraser > --- a/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h > +++ b/xen/include/xen/spinlock.h > @@ -115,11 +115,10 @@ extern void spinlock_profile_reset(unsig > > #else > > -struct lock_profile { }; > struct lock_profile_qhead { }; > > #define SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED > \ > - { _RAW_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED, 0xfffu, 0, _LOCK_DEBUG, NULL } > + { _RAW_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED, 0xfffu, 0, _LOCK_DEBUG } > #define DEFINE_SPINLOCK(l) spinlock_t l = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED > > #define spin_lock_init_prof(s, l) spin_lock_init(&((s)->l)) > @@ -133,7 +132,9 @@ typedef struct spinlock { > u16 recurse_cpu:12; > u16 recurse_cnt:4; > struct lock_debug debug; > +#ifdef LOCK_PROFILE > struct lock_profile *profile; > +#endif > } spinlock_t; > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel