On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Robert Jennings <rcj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * Pekka Enberg (penberg@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Robert Jennings <rcj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > There is no need to set the bits in the first- and second-level indices >> > to indicate a free page when we know that a free page existed at this >> > level. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Robert Jennings <rcj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Why is it not necessary? I don't know that part of the code well >> enough to tell if this patch is safe or not. > > This change is in a conditional block which is entered only when there is > an existing data block on the freelist where the insert has taken place. > > The new block is pushed onto the freelist stack and this conditional block > is updating links in the prior stack head to point to the new stack head. > After this conditional block the first-/second-level indices are updated > to indicate that there is a free block at this location. > > This patch adds an immediate return from the conditional block to avoid > setting bits again to indicate a free block on this freelist. They would > already be set because there was an existing free block on this freelist. Some of that information could be put in the changelog. Reviewed-by: Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
