linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety

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]

Message-Id: <200612022232.03345.zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Date:	Sat, 2 Dec 2006 22:32:01 +0100
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] timers, pointers to functions and type safety

Hi,

On Saturday 02 December 2006 17:02, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 03:45:12PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > What's the cruft ?
> >
> > struct bla = container_of(timer, struct bla, timer); ???
>
> That's it, right there.  Any idea how much we've bloated the kernel with
> sysfs, just by insisting that the struct device not be the first item in
> the struct?

sysfs is a major bloat indeed, but that's not it.
If at all this generates smaller code, as only one pointer is needed instead 
of two.

bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/