lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/4] [RFC] UIO: generic platform driver
Hello Hans,

Hans J. Koch wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 08:21:06AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > > + for (i = 0; i < pdev->num_resources; ++i) {
> > > > + struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i];
> > >
> > > Please don't define new variables in the middle of a function.
> > This is a matter of taste. In my eyes it's better to declare it here
> > because then it's easier to see where it's used.
>
> No. It's more important to see which variables are declared in the
> function and which are declared elsewhere. If you have to search the
> whole body of a function for possible declarations, this is BAD. And if
> it's not clear where a variable is used, the function is too long or has
> other style problems. Your function is short and clean, so where's the
> problem? Please move the declaration to the top of the function.
I'm not conviced and still prefer it that way. I gave way for your
requests in uio.c because it's your code. I want to leave it as it is
and hope you will accept that (as this is my code).

> > BTW would you be open to redefine uio_info as:
> >
> > struct uio_info {
> > struct uio_device *uio_dev;
> > ...
> > size_t num_memmaps;
> > struct uio_mem mem[];
> > }
> >
> > This allows to allocate exactly the number of members in the mem array
> > that are needed (for the cost of a size_t). (You just do:
> >
> > uio_info uioinfo = kzalloc(sizeof(*uioinfo) + num_memmaps * sizeof(uioinfo->mem[0]), GFP_KERNEL);
> >
> > it's still one chunk of memory and usage is similar---just with
> > MAX_UIO_MAPS substituted by uioinfo->num_memmaps.)
>
> I don't like it. It makes things more complicated without any obvious
> gain.
Most use cases I imagine only use a single mapping, so the gain would be
to save 4 (or later more) 'struct uio_mem's per device.

> sizeof(struct uio_info) would return wrong values,
For which definition of wrong? sizeof(struct uio_info) don't include
space for mem then, but in my eyes that's correct. Having to care about
the size of mem is the burden when it's not constant.

> you need to
> free the extra memory,
There is no extra memory because uioinfo and it's mem member are
allocated together with a single kzalloc (and must be). (Thats the
difference to

struct uio_info {
...
size_t num_memmaps;
struct uio_mem *mem;
};

.)
> userspace applications need to be able to deal
> with 10000 mappings...
For the userspace it's exactly the same, isn't it?

Best regards
Uwe

--
Uwe Kleine-König, Software Engineer
Digi International GmbH Branch Breisach, Küferstrasse 8, 79206 Breisach, Germany
Tax: 315/5781/0242 / VAT: DE153662976 / Reg. Amtsgericht Dortmund HRB 13962
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-11 12:45    [W:0.187 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site