From: "Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] PCI: dwc: put struct dw_pcie::{ep,pp} into a union to reduce its size
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 02:31:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YFqWftATEbuxsJbn@rocinante> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210312140116.9453-1-alobakin@pm.me>
Hi Alexander,
Thank you for sending the patch over!
> A single dw_pcie entity can't be a root complex and an endpoint at
> the same time.
Nice catch!
A small nitpick: this would be Root Complex and Endpoint, as it's
customary to capitalise these.
Also, if you could capitalise the subject line - it could also perhaps
be simplified to something like, for example:
Optimize struct dw_pcie to reduce its size
Feel free to ignore both suggestions, as these are just nitpicks.
> We can use this to reduce the size of dw_pcie by 80, from 280 to 200
> bytes (on x32, guess more on x64), by putting the related embedded
> structures (struct pcie_port and struct dw_pcie_ep) into a union.
[...]
> - struct pcie_port pp;
> - struct dw_pcie_ep ep;
> + union {
> + struct pcie_port pp;
> + struct dw_pcie_ep ep;
> + };
[...]
How did you measure the difference? Often, people include pahole output
for the "before" and "after", so to speak, to showcase the difference
and/or improvement. Do you have something like that handy?
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-24 1:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-12 14:01 [PATCH RESEND] PCI: dwc: put struct dw_pcie::{ep,pp} into a union to reduce its size Alexander Lobakin
2021-03-24 1:31 ` Krzysztof Wilczyński [this message]
2021-03-24 11:33 ` Alexander Lobakin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YFqWftATEbuxsJbn@rocinante \
--to=kw@linux.com \
--cc=alobakin@pm.me \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com \
--cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).