linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/16] gpio: dwapb: Use modern PM macros

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: <CAHp75Vdpgf3DUMQw0mYqhG=9UrYG8KWrobbd387QZapBor_LHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 22:04:39 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Michael Büsch <mb@...s.ch>
Cc: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>, Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>, 
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, 
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Michael Buesch <m@...s.ch>, Hoan Tran <hoan@...amperecomputing.com>, 
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Daniel Palmer <daniel@...ngy.jp>, 
	Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>, Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>, 
	Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>, 
	Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>, Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>, 
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@....com>, 
	Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@....com>, Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>, 
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux@...tq-group.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] gpio: dwapb: Use modern PM macros

On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 8:11 PM Michael Büsch <mb@...s.ch> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 19:54:44 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > > The dwapb_context structure is always embedded into struct
> > > dwapb_gpio_port to simplify code. Sure this brings a tiny 36 bytes
> > > data overhead for !CONFIG_PM_SLEP.
> >
> > I don't think it's a good approach to add a lot of data for peanuts in
> > case of PM_SLEEP=n.
>
> It wastes 36 bytes in case of PM=n.

...per port.

> The driver currently allocates the struct with kzalloc and stores a pointer to it
> in case of PM=y.
> So this probably has an overhead in the same order of magnitude (pointer +
> malloc overhead/alignment/fragmentation) in case of PM=y now.

...per driver.

So, I can't say it's equal, but I leave this to maintainers to decide,


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko