Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1315297

Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for continuous_voltage_range

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:15:28AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 20:24 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

> > -	bool continuous_voltage_range;
> > +	unsigned int continuous_voltage_range:1;

> Is this really valuable?

> There are already padding bytes that are unused
> and adding a couple more bools would be space
> cost-free and more readable.

> I believe that read/write of bytes is also more
> efficient on some architectures than bit field
> read/modify/write uses.

It adds up when you get more flags and these are not in the least bit
performance sensitive.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for continuous_voltage_range Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-01-21 21:30 +0100
  [PATCH 2/2] regulator: core: Provide per-regulator runtime PM support Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-01-21 21:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 2/2] regulator: core: Provide per-regulator runtime PM  support kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2016-01-21 23:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for  continuous_voltage_range Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-01-22 20:20 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for  continuous_voltage_range Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-01-22 22:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for  continuous_voltage_range Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-01-22 22:50 +0100
        Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: core: Use a bitfield for  continuous_voltage_range Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-01-23 16:20 +0100

csiph-web