On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 07:06:43PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 09:02 -0700, 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? There's any number of 2- and 3- line functions calling each > > other, each adding and subtracting constants from the pointers passed to > > them. This was a huge mistake, IMO. > > What a nonsense. > > foo->timer.data = foo; > > is complete redundant information. > > This is going to make a lot of data structures smaller, when the > timer_list is embedded in the structure itself and for the lot, which > ignores the timer callback argument anyway.
container_of => still lousy type safety. All over the sodding place. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
