| > + /* Update loss event rate (scaled by 1e6), cf. RFC 4342, 8.5 */
| > pinv = opt_recv->ccid3or_loss_event_rate;
| > - if (pinv == ~0U || pinv == 0) /* see RFC 4342, 8.5 */
| > - hctx->ccid3hctx_p = 0;
| > - else /* can not exceed 100% */
| > - hctx->ccid3hctx_p = 1000000 / pinv;
| > + hctx->ccid3hctx_p = (pinv == ~0U || pinv == 0)? 0 : scaled_div(1,
pinv);
| >
|
| Agree with the scaled_div bit but don't like removing if/then and
| repalce withing ?: as harder to read and compiler can optimise just as
| well. Matter of personal choice though so up to Arnaldo really.
|
I could take this patch out if you / Arnaldo think so, since it is overridden
later
by another patch which uses only one socket field instead of two (p depends on
pinv,
so having both is redundant).
Please let me be state this - I aim as best as possible to avoid overlap and
overriding
in later patches. But this is not always possible and - having just spent
almost two
days integrating away another patch set with my local changesets - can
sometimes be
a real nightmare. It is not always avoidable when trying to split larger
changes into
small and separate chunks.
-
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
