On 10/8/18 1:00 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> bool is good as parameter type or function return type, but if used
> for struct members it consumes more memory than needed.
> Changing the bool members of struct net_device to bitfield members
> allows to decrease the memory footprint of this struct.
>
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallwe...@gmail.com>
> ---
> include/linux/netdevice.h | 24 +++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> index 76603ee13..3d7b8df2e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -1651,10 +1651,6 @@ enum netdev_priv_flags {
> * @dev_port: Used to differentiate devices that share
> * the same function
> * @addr_list_lock: XXX: need comments on this one
> - * @uc_promisc: Counter that indicates promiscuous mode
> - * has been enabled due to the need to listen to
> - * additional unicast addresses in a device that
> - * does not implement ndo_set_rx_mode()
> * @uc: unicast mac addresses
> * @mc: multicast mac addresses
> * @dev_addrs: list of device hw addresses
> @@ -1714,11 +1710,9 @@ enum netdev_priv_flags {
> * @link_watch_list: XXX: need comments on this one
> *
> * @reg_state: Register/unregister state machine
> - * @dismantle: Device is going to be freed
> * @rtnl_link_state: This enum represents the phases of creating
> * a new link
> *
> - * @needs_free_netdev: Should unregister perform free_netdev?
> * @priv_destructor: Called from unregister
> * @npinfo: XXX: need comments on this one
> * @nd_net: Network namespace this network device is inside
> @@ -1758,6 +1752,15 @@ enum netdev_priv_flags {
> * @qdisc_tx_busylock: lockdep class annotating Qdisc->busylock spinlock
> * @qdisc_running_key: lockdep class annotating Qdisc->running seqcount
> *
> + * @uc_promisc: Counter that indicates promiscuous mode
> + * has been enabled due to the need to listen to
> + * additional unicast addresses in a device that
> + * does not implement ndo_set_rx_mode()
Hi,
I see that all you did is copy/paste that text (above), but I wouldn't call
a single bit a [1-bit] Counter.
thanks,
--
~Randy
