[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YhqJ8yqcjKJqHfcR@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2022 12:13:39 -0800
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Meng Tang <tangmeng@...ontech.com>
Cc: keescook@...omium.org, yzaikin@...gle.com, guoren@...nel.org,
nickhu@...estech.com, green.hu@...il.com, deanbo422@...il.com,
ebiggers@...nel.org, tytso@....edu, wad@...omium.org,
john.johansen@...onical.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] fs/proc: Optimize arrays defined by struct
ctl_path
On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:32:17PM +0800, Meng Tang wrote:
> Previously, arrays defined by struct ctl_path is terminated
> with an empty one. When we actually only register one ctl_path,
> we've gone from 8 bytes to 16 bytes.
>
> The optimization has been implemented in the previous patch,
> here to remove unnecessary terminate ctl_path with an empty one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Meng Tang <tangmeng@...ontech.com>
If these things are built-in, can you verify you're saving bytes
with size before and after the patch?
I wonder if having something like DECLARE_SYSCTL_PATH_ONE() would make
this nicer on the eyes, and also useful for the other changes you
are making. Do you have many other single path entries you are changing
later?
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists