[PATCH] reduce the size of devices

[Myles Watson]

Use linked lists for resources instead of fixed arrays.

resources.diff - changes the definitions
resource_usage.diff - changes the functions where resources are used
sconfig.diff - changes the device tree
> From the qemu boot log:

before:
malloc Enter, size 1092, free_mem_ptr 00118444
malloc 00118444

after:
malloc Enter, size 228, free_mem_ptr 001180e4
malloc 001180e4

I allocate resources in blocks of 64.  It could be smaller to decrease
memory usage, but I think it's plenty large (2560 bytes)

Signed-off-by: Myles Watson

Thanks,
Myles

[Myles Watson]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Myles Watson  wrote:
> Use linked lists for resources instead of fixed arrays.
> resource_usage.diff - changes the functions where resources are used

Here's an updated patch that doesn't hang :)  I was in too much of a
hurry.  We could add the resources to the end of the list to maintain
the old order if anyone cares.  Since we're using a list, the
resources are in reverse order.

Signed-off-by: Myles Watson

Thanks,
Myles

[Myles Watson]

> We could add the resources to the end of the list to maintain
> the old order if anyone cares.  Since we're using a list, the
> resources are in reverse order.

Since it makes it easier to debug in case there's a problem, here it is.

Signed-off-by: Myles Watson

Thanks,
Myles

[Patrick Georgi]

Am 21.05.2010 01:08, schrieb Myles Watson:
> static void free_resource(device_t dev, struct resource *res, struct

resource *prev)
> ...
> res->next = free_resources;
> free_resources = res->next;

Shouldn't that be
+	res->next = free_resources;
+	free_resources = res;
to add res to the free_resources?

Other than that, this is great! Smaller, cleaner, faster code, that uses
less memory to achieve the same result - wonderful!

With the above thing cleared up, this is
Acked-by: Patrick Georgi

[Myles Watson]

On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Patrick Georgi  wrote:
> Am 21.05.2010 01:08, schrieb Myles Watson:
> > static void free_resource(device_t dev, struct resource *res, struct
>
> resource *prev)
> > ...
> > res->next = free_resources;
> > free_resources = res->next;
>
> Shouldn't that be
> res->next = free_resources;
> free_resources = res;
>
> to add res to the free_resources?

Yes.  Thanks for catching it.  It's too bad to leak the memory you're
saving :)  Fixed.
> Other than that, this is great! Smaller, cleaner, faster code, that uses
> less memory to achieve the same result - wonderful!

Thanks.  If we do the same thing with links we could save another ~150
bytes per device.  There are 8 links per device when few of them have
any at all.
> With the above thing cleared up, this is
> Acked-by: Patrick Georgi

Rev 5576.

Thanks,
Myles

[Patrick Georgi]

Am 20.05.2010 21:16, schrieb Myles Watson:
> Signed-off-by: Myles Watson

resources.diff and sconfig.diff are
Acked-by: Patrick Georgi