Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1445361 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-07-18 12:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-07-18 12:30 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH] bcache: untagle cache_aolloc Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 12:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH] bcache: untagle cache_aolloc Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 12:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH] bcache: untagle cache_aolloc Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> - 2016-07-18 12:30 +0200
| From | Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 12:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] bcache: untagle cache_aolloc |
| Message-ID | <rWdOy-4To-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:11:09PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > bcache's cache_alloc() function currenty has no way freeing memory if one of > the allocations fails. Untangle the if + allocation statement so we have > defined checkpoints to free previous allocations if one fails. nack. The existing error path handles failure midway through just fine.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 12:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rWdYd-4WI-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1445361 |
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:24:11PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 02:13:33AM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:11:09PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > > bcache's cache_alloc() function currenty has no way freeing memory if one of > > > the allocations fails. Untangle the if + allocation statement so we have > > > defined checkpoints to free previous allocations if one fails. > > > > nack. The existing error path handles failure midway through just fine. > > Come on, the patch improves the readability of the if statement by some orders > of magnitude as well. > > Are you OK with it if I change the subject/commit log? No, it's just churn and I don't agree that it improves readability. On the contrary, now the cleanup code has to be duplicated in two places - which invites them getting out of sync and introducing bugs.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-07-18 12:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rWdYd-4WI-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1445361 |
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 02:13:33AM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:11:09PM +0200, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > > bcache's cache_alloc() function currenty has no way freeing memory if one of > > the allocations fails. Untangle the if + allocation statement so we have > > defined checkpoints to free previous allocations if one fails. > > nack. The existing error path handles failure midway through just fine. Come on, the patch improves the readability of the if statement by some orders of magnitude as well. Are you OK with it if I change the subject/commit log? Johannes -- Johannes Thumshirn Storage jthumshirn@suse.de +49 911 74053 689 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web