2016-08-25 16:28 GMT+09:00 Chanwoo Choi [off-list ref]:

Hi Stephen,

On 2016? 08? 25? 09:11, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

On 08/24, Chanwoo Choi wrote:

quoted

On 2016? 08? 24? 13:43, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

On 08/23, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:

quoted

So the saving is rather insignificant but the patch doesn't make
things worse and I'd say it might be worth applying.

Sounds good. This sort of information should be in the commit
text though. Talking about const doesn't make any sense to me.

Do you mean that 'const' is initconst secion?

No. Marking it as initconst in the patch is correct.

OK.

quoted

quoted

If possible, could you explain the anything
why you don't make sense about 'const'?

I'm just saying that the reasoning to move it from the text
section to the data section shouldn't be because of const. There
should be better reasons to do this, like size benefits.

As I already said, the samsung_cmu_register_on() requires
the 'const' type argument for 'struct samsung_cmu_info'.

If a function takes a const pointer as an argument, then it's
perfectly valid to give a non-const pointer. Casting from non-cost
into const is valid, other way around not.

So, I defined the instance on the out of the exynos5260_clk_aud_init() as following:
        static const struct samsung_cmu_info aud_cmu __initconst = {

How can i add the 'const' keyword and '__initsecion' to the
"struct samsung_cmu_info aud_cmu" in the "static void __init
exynos5260_clk_aud_init(struct device_node *np)"?

Stephen meant that there must be some benefit from a change to make it
worth being included into the kernel.

Best regards,
Tomasz