[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160122213115.GF6588@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 21:31:15 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Paul Kocialkowski <contact@...lk.fr>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for
continuous_voltage_range
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:15:28AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 20:24 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > - bool continuous_voltage_range;
> > + unsigned int continuous_voltage_range:1;
> Is this really valuable?
> There are already padding bytes that are unused
> and adding a couple more bools would be space
> cost-free and more readable.
> I believe that read/write of bytes is also more
> efficient on some architectures than bit field
> read/modify/write uses.
It adds up when you get more flags and these are not in the least bit
performance sensitive.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists