On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2017-08-07 at 09:29 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: >> Hello, >> >> On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 08:54:21PM +0530, Bhumika Goyal wrote: >> > I compiled the .o files and checked the size before and after >> > compilation. After making the structure const, bytes should move from >> > data to text segment of the memory and this is what happened. So, this >> > is how I tested it. >> >> Ah, I see, so the port_operations is never used directly. I'm not >> sure whether it'd be a good idea to selectively pick these and makr >> them const. Let's just leave them be. > > Why? > > Things that are never accessed as other than const should > be const no? > I think it would be better to leave them as in most situations the ata_port_operations structures cannot be const as they are only used in the port_ops field of an ata_port_info structure and this field is not const. Having two ata_port_operations const and others non-const will cause code inconsistency. Thanks, Bhumika > Why leave unnecessary exposure for muckery? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
