> On 11 Nov 2016, at 22:28, Jaromír Doleček <jaromir.dole...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2016-11-11 11:52 GMT+01:00 J. Hannken-Illjes <hann...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de>:
>> Returning a pointer to an arbitrary list element and using it
>> later is bad design. Would be better to define as:
>>
>> wapbl_unregister_deallocation(struct wapbl *wl, daddr_t blk, int len)
>> {
>
> I simply want to have it O(1). I think it is useful to keep the error
> path there fast, as it would be quite common for wapbl case. Also just
> passing the (opaque) pointer makes it simpler.
This error path (call UFS_WAPBL_UNREGISTER_DEALLOCATION()) is not that
common and runs not more than once during one run of ffs_truncate().
I don't see a need to have it O(1).
--
J. Hannken-Illjes - hann...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de - TU Braunschweig (Germany)
