On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 06:45:30PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> >
> > The label rename while more descriptive also seems entirely unrelated.
>
> That was one of your previous suggestions :)
>
> I'll push it back up one patch into the cleanup patch and leave this
> as an optimisation only patch.
Oh well. Just keep it then :)
> > > + /* Scan the free entry array for a large enough free space. */
> > > + do {
> > > + if (be16_to_cpu(bests[findex]) != NULLDATAOFF &&
> > > + be16_to_cpu(bests[findex]) >= length) {
> > > + dbno = freehdr.firstdb + findex;
> > > + goto found_block;
> > > }
> > > + } while (++findex < freehdr.nvalid);
> >
> > Nit: wou;dn't this be better written as a for loop also taking the
> > initialization of findex into the loop?
>
> Agreed - the next patch does that with the reversal of the search
> order. The end result is what you're asking for, so I'll leave this
> alone for now....
If you touch this patch anyway please just switch to the for loop
here, that keeps the churn down in the next one.
