From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FAKE_REPLY_C,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03903C433EF for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:10:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A092E208CB for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 20:10:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="TABCspmh" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A092E208CB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755437AbeFNUKC (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2018 16:10:02 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f171.google.com ([209.85.128.171]:42972 "EHLO mail-wr0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755265AbeFNUKA (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2018 16:10:00 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f171.google.com with SMTP id w10-v6so7695284wrk.9; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:09:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-disposition :user-agent; bh=R9oBzNzy6F0b/9q/6sN2dNxP/OmIgu9qQ38Fktg2+uY=; b=TABCspmhhK7E/YTX4KOo0/++RtblzR5loYT6c9zUVPFchai9yhUz7iJxp0fIZDrefW LydfsNORuuuxNT956r+liV5fIdgC3rawE/5GUFfN6eWk9nAipHZJQ/vrFxpTxu45j5Wo PYVQ3d0uiNBlXEmVqRGy+KPIAL6PoZm/vMnaKg0+SoBEtFVPyI/eScEa6MfDFH+0jtP3 lR4+NAbxJ4Wqv7Fx9zIRKfsnGkvTSJagqmTwjSFXzRioPHGxam7B8OHkSAuz1/nNmwvw de6lSVuC+2AnfXgK24fPSrJbdY5mbFDTzThDrZC1gNHxNxMqMUCpz9x+5OGmqJ8AWzpF USOg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version :content-disposition:user-agent; bh=R9oBzNzy6F0b/9q/6sN2dNxP/OmIgu9qQ38Fktg2+uY=; b=EP8nqlY+k/IxQKPp+UeHfBiIB7QKupSsY2/ykCdXDXxd+jFMCWnZwaKoo5GQ01njRz c5H7iUskPvglI80pzkPdu8difCBv1OXnx92V9NzVt7FVG+XBWUQvwz1g3+FbkRVOD7Ji f/6co9+a/pGc8KOVtzUkF8S9QLBvn2RWEL2Buvzyrv0eeNjyIlqXFH7sZQAx98zY6vWY Bm5fYIg3etbIqPSrrc/VhWn+tpSr3tQH06a2066adk0gXaY5TX8b2X3+OmswY6hG+th2 NNtudpSddkvQexVHzRKS5MJ3HwRaTWzq20h9rraiGQCfiE4HSowaCBp8yC3IBCDkOnrB 5W/g== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2Bf7MbZnEjvQuENjkeW5i++xhcy/ZzzB9/ddObh+Nw4VAdmtN2 SK145rrn1LcFqNuL09EOYxpC X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKIh39liZfHdkMTu7q2CkE7uneKQrZSG2xdf64KgIA6YDt+kZVf5CPylsRPYSioD687u1aChYQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:fb92:: with SMTP id a18-v6mr3401102wrr.278.1529006999185; Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:09:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from avx2 (nat4-minsk-pool-46-53-177-92.telecom.by. [46.53.177.92]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l15-v6sm5609006wrs.95.2018.06.14.13.09.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Jun 2018 13:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 23:09:56 +0300 From: Alexey Dobriyan To: dhowells@redhat.com Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: Make inline name size calculation automatic Message-ID: <20180614200956.GB7137@avx2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Require a minimum inline name size of 33+1 to allow for names that look > like two hex numbers with a dash between. Hi, David. Why 34? /proc will fallback to separate allocation for name anyway. I sent nearly identical patch earlier. https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=152667374404900&w=4 If you compare, the differences are: * no BUILD_BUG_ON, * 64 bytes is too litle even on 32-bit, * 512 bytes is probably too much even on 64-bit. > - .name = proc_root.inline_name, > - .inline_name = "/proc", > + .name = "/proc", This will "uninline" 5 bytes wasting space.