Am Mittwoch, 6. Juni 2007 schrieb Pete Zaitcev:
> So, you add 24 bytes to all URBs, which are... not very thin, to be sure.
> Last time I counted they were 152 bytes apiece. Still, a 15% increase.
> I know you're a good algorithmist, are you sure you don't have any ideas?
>
> The naive approach is to have anchor elements out of line... In a slab,
> since they are fixed-sized. What do you think?
1. We can reorder elements a bit. The are taking padding in the 64 bit case
2. We can merge struct usb_device* and pipe into struct endpoint*
3. We could move to a union for the control and iso/int fields
Why do you care that much about the size of struct urb? There are a few
hundred of these structures at most at any given time. I think we gain more
in memory usage if we make using URBs easier, shrinking drivers' code.
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
