On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:13:24 -0800
Venkatesh Pallipadi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 06:11:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:28:45 -0800
> > Venkatesh Pallipadi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > struct timer_list {
> > > struct list_head entry;
> > > unsigned long expires;
> > > @@ -16,6 +18,7 @@
> > > unsigned long data;
> > >
> > > struct tvec_t_base_s *base;
> > > + int flags;
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_TIMER_STATS
> >
> > Adding a new field to the timer_list is somewhat of a hit - this is going
> > to make an awful lot of data structures a bit larger. Some of which we
> > allocate a large number of.
> >
> > I think we could justfy getting nasty and using the LSB of
> > timer_list.function for this..
>
> That is a clever idea... Is that going to work in all architectures with all
> compiler flags?
Don't know. Possibly not. Other options are list.next, list.prev and
base. None of them are pleasant.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
