RE: [PATCH] mm: change "char *bdi_unknown_name" to "char bdi_unknown_name[]"

From: David Laight
Date: Fri May 13 2022 - 07:06:35 EST


From: Andrew Morton
> Sent: 12 May 2022 21:01
>
> On Thu, 12 May 2022 16:26:37 +0800 liqiong <liqiong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > "char bdi_unknown_nam[]" string form declares a single variable.
> > It is better then "char *bdi_unknown_name" which creates two
> > variables.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > --- a/mm/backing-dev.c
> > +++ b/mm/backing-dev.c
> > @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ struct backing_dev_info noop_backing_dev_info;
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(noop_backing_dev_info);
> >
> > static struct class *bdi_class;
> > -static const char *bdi_unknown_name = "(unknown)";
> > +static const char bdi_unknown_name[] = "(unknown)";
> >
>
> heh, fun patch. We actually do this quite a lot.
>
> grep -r "^[a-z].*char \*[a-z].*= \"" .
>
> is a pathetic pattern which catches a lot of them.
>
>
> However. I expected your patch to shrink the kernel a bit, but it has
> the opposite effect:
>
> hp2:/usr/src/25> size mm/backing-dev.o
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 21288 9396 3808 34492 86bc mm/backing-dev.o-before
> 21300 9428 3808 34536 86e8 mm/backing-dev.o-after
>
> Even .data became larger. I didn't investigate why.

The linker can merge replicated strings
(ie data in .rodata.str1.n sections)
but I don't think the compiler puts variables into that section.

So if you have:
static const char *const foo_xxx = "foo";
in multiple source/object files you get lots of pointers
but only one string.
OTOH with:
static const char foo_xxx[] = "foo";
you get lots of copies of the string.
Which is smaller depends on the number of variables and the length
of the string.

David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)