On 1/31/14, 10:28 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 01/31/14 09:51, Jeff Liu wrote: >> >> On 01/31 2014 23:30 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> On 1/31/14, 9:28 AM, Jeff Liu wrote: >>>> >>>> On 01/31 2014 23:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>>>> On 1/31/14, 8:13 AM, Jeff Liu wrote: >>>>>> From: Jie Liu<jeff.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no need to travel through the whole bitmap items to verify >>>>>> if the bitmap array is empty or not, instead, just return 0 directly >>>>>> if an item is detected in bitmap array. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jie Liu<jeff.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Makes sense (and the long loop was my fault, I guess, but it's >>>>> better than it was, see commit 24ad33f!) >>>> >>>> Ah, you have killed a lots code there! :) >>>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen<sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> I wonder if something like: >>>>> >>>>> return (find_first_set(map, size) == size); >>>>> >>>>> would be faster (or if it'd be worth it)...? >>>>> Probably not. :) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well, when I looking through our bitmap source, I once thought if >>>> we can replace the current code with the generic bitmap library. >>>> However, our map is uint rather than unsigned long... >>> >>> Technically the unsigned long (pointer) is just the bitmap address, >>> I think. >> >> Yeah, so this might worth to try on long terms. >> > > The blf_data_map[] is int aligned, not long aligned. > You could reflect the alignment difference in the offset or > change the alignment in the structure. Oh, I guess it does matter. Sometimes C escapes me... probably not worth messing with. I'll stop thinking out loud in front of everybody, now. ;) Thanks, -Eric > --Mark. > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
