[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170521070017.GA13082@lst.de>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2017 09:00:17 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Mark Gross <mark.gross@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] timers: provide a "modern" variant of timers
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 10:57:31AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> How expensive would it be to add another field to timer_list and
> just have both pointers?
That would add 4/8 bytes to every structure containing a timer,
so I'd rather avoid it if possible. But one option might be to
inflict this onto users of outdated compilers and use the union
for modern ones.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists