linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata-eh: Use switch() instead of sparse array for protocol strings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 9 Jan 2017 16:40:19 +0100
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     "linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata-eh: Use switch() instead of sparse array for
 protocol strings

Hi Tejun,

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 03:49:28PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Replace the sparse 256-pointer array for looking up protocol strings by
>> a switch() statement to reduce kernel size.
>>
>> According to bloat-o-meter, this saves 910 bytes on m68k (32-bit), and
>> 1892 bytes on arm64 (64-bit).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
>
> Gees, thanks for catching that.
>
> Applied to libata/for-4.11.

Thanks!

There are two more that annoy me, but I don't know how to fix them:

ata_scsi_rbuf                                  -    4096   +4096
ata_force_param_buf                            -    4096   +4096

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds