| I would like to change the loss interval linked list to a fixed size 8
| element array as we're not changing the size of the linked list at any
| time so it is very inefficient (probably a text book case of when not
| to use a linked list!!)
Absolutely agree - I was scratching my head about the complexity of the code
and with an array we would have simpler code.
Witness for instance, dccp_li_hist_interval_new() -- it allocates a fixed list
of
length 8, the corresponding (static) array allocation is a one-liner.
In ccid3_hc_rx_update_li(), there is a complex allocation when the list has not
just been created:
* first list_add() is called to enqueue at the head of the list
* and then list_del() is called to remove the oldest loss interval
This is a very complex way of managing a ring buffer. Adding to this that we are
using ~0U to identify empty loss intervals, we would probably much better off
with an array; but this array would have to be managed in the same way as a ring
buffer (but that is not difficult, also textbook stuff)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
