On 12/27/2014 06:58 PM, nick wrote:
> Greetings Dave,
> I am wondering why there is a TO DO above this code:
> * ToDo: tlocks should be on doubly-linked list, so we can
> * quickly remove it and add it to the end.
I'm sure the idea was to avoid the for loop needed to find the previous
entry in the linked list. A doubly-linked list makes it much simpler to
remove an item from an arbitrary position in the list.
> */
>
> /*
> * Move parent page's tlock to the end of the tid's tlock list
> */
> if (log && mp->lid && (tblk->last != mp->lid) &&
> lid_to_tlock(mp->lid)->tid) {
> lid_t lid = mp->lid;
> struct tlock *prev;
>
> tlck = lid_to_tlock(lid);
>
> if (tblk->next == lid)
> tblk->next = tlck->next;
> else {
> for (prev = lid_to_tlock(tblk->next);
> prev->next != lid;
> prev = lid_to_tlock(prev->next)) {
> assert(prev->next);
> }
> prev->next = tlck->next;
> }
> lid_to_tlock(tblk->last)->next = lid;
> tlck->next = 0;
> tblk->last = lid;
> }
> As this code clearly moves the locks onto a linked list. Therefore I am
> recommend we remove this
> TO DO as this is clearly misleading and no longer needed.
That comment has been in the code forever and I don't have any intention
of changing things, but I don't think it's wrong. I don't mind removing
it, though. jfs has been barely maintained and there is a ton of cleanup
that can be done if someone were willing to take the time to do it.
Thanks,
Shaggy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming! The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jfs-discussion
