On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 8:30 PM Ben Peart <peart...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Ben Peart <benpe...@microsoft.com> > > With refresh_index() learning to utilize preload_index() to speed up its > operation there is no longer any benefit to having the caller preload the > index first. Remove those unneeded calls by calling read_index() instead of > the preload variant. > > There is no measurable performance impact of this patch - the 2nd call to > preload_index() bails out quickly but there is no reason to call it twice.
Obviously correct. It's not shown in the context lines, but there's also a refresh_index() after read_index() in sequencer.c too. -- Duy
