On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:14 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:29 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:35 AM Andrii Nakryiko > > <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Minimize duplication of the code, no one said copy/paste all the code. > > > But memory bloat is a real problem and should be justification enough > > > to at least consider other options. > > > > Sure, I have no problem with this. The question is how do we balance? > > Is rewriting 200 lines of code to save 8 bytes of each entry acceptable? > > What about rewriting 2000 lines of code? Do people prefer to review 200 > > or 2000 (or whatever number) lines of code? Or people just want a > > minimal change for easier reviews? > > No worry any more. I manage to find some way to reuse the existing I never worried. But I'm glad you figured it out. > members, that is lru_node. So the end result is putting gc stuff into > the union with lru_node without increasing the size of htab_elem. > And of course, without duplicating/refactoring regular htab code. > > Thanks.
