On Tue, 5 May 2015, James Bottomley wrote: > > The cost is duplication of the .owner field in every Scsi_Host. The > > savings is a reduction in the number of scsi_host_templates. > > So your essential objection is the host template duplication? I know > it's a couple of hundred bytes, but surely its dwarfed by all the other > stuff you have to duplicate ... the module size of each of these is > around 0.25MB, so a couple of hundred bytes would seem a bit > insignificant. Agreed, the size is relatively insignificant. I drop any objection on that account. (But turning things around, what's wrong with duplicating the .owner field in the Scsi_Host structure when we're already duplicating this_id, can_queue, sg_tablesize, and a large bunch of others?) On the other hand, your code to populate the template copies is a mess. I like Akinobu's approach much better, although I would change a few details: Declare usb_stor_host_template as "const", and define a new, separate usb_stor_template in usb.c for actual use. In usb_stor_host_template_init(), do a plain structure assignment rather than memcpy. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
