On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 09:31 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > On 09/23/2012 12:19 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-04-19 at 10:54 +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > >> Nowadays, we are using more hashmaps and other things, than we did > >> before. Therefore, I often get the "flist is full (don't worry)" > >> message. This change should avoid that message. I was unable to find > >> any significance in increase of memory footprint from this change. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: David Henningsson <david.henningsson at canonical.com> > >> --- > >> src/pulsecore/flist.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/src/pulsecore/flist.c b/src/pulsecore/flist.c > >> index 0aa95c7..b110e1e 100644 > >> --- a/src/pulsecore/flist.c > >> +++ b/src/pulsecore/flist.c > >> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ > >> > >> #include "flist.h" > >> > >> -#define FLIST_SIZE 128 > >> +#define FLIST_SIZE 256 > >> > >> /* Atomic table indices contain > >> sign bit = if set, indicates empty/NULL value > > > > Thanks, applied now. Regarding the "flist is full (don't worry)" > > message: wouldn't it be better to print it in pa_flist_pop() rather than > > pa_flist_push()? (Replacing the word "full" with "empty", of course.) I > > think it's more useful to know when the flist gets empty rather than > > full. Or a message could be printed in both places. > > Hmm, good question. I wonder if this would lead to a myriad of messages > in the beginning? If not, feel free to add an "empty" message as well. If it leads to any messages in a "normal" setup, then the flist sizes need to be tuned some more (I guess at least the hashmap flist could be larger). -- Tanu
