From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1162135AbdAIRcM (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:32:12 -0500 Received: from mail-qt0-f194.google.com ([209.85.216.194]:33959 "EHLO mail-qt0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935323AbdAIRcD (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:32:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 12:31:54 -0500 From: Tejun Heo To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata-eh: Use switch() instead of sparse array for protocol strings Message-ID: <20170109173154.GE12827@mtj.duckdns.org> References: <1483973368-6828-1-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org> <20170109152319.GA12827@mtj.duckdns.org> <20170109160424.GB12827@mtj.duckdns.org> <20170109172723.GA30423@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170109172723.GA30423@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:27:23AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 05:30:02PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > ata_force_param_buf is __initdata and shouldn't really matter. > > > > It mainly matters because of e.g. bootloader limitations. > > Do we need a full 4k for the force parameters? What would a typical > command line for it look like? Maybe a couple hundreds bytes at max, but it's a bit weird to restrict this given that it is bss, not gigantic and __initdata. What kind of bootloader limitations are we talking about? Thanks. -- tejun