> struct fd {
> struct file *file;
> - int need_put;
> + unsigned need_put:1, need_pos_unlock:1;
> };
Since we're rounding up to 2*sizeof(struct file *) anyway, is this a case
where wasting space on a couple of char (or bool) flags would generate
better code than a bitfield?
In particular, the code to set need_pos_unlock (which will be executed
each read/write for most files) is messy in the bitfield case.
A byte store is much cleaner.
(If you want to use bits, why not use the two lsbits of the file pointer
for the purpose? That would save a lot of space.)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
