On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 09:58:06AM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > We only calculate it at the same time as we calculate the distance. This > is necessary because, to calculate the type, we have to walk the tree > and check the ACS bits. If we separated it, we'd have to walk the tree > twice in a very similar way just to determine both the distance and the > mapping type.
Calculating it together makes perfect sense. What I find odd is the overloading of a single return value. Why not return the map type as the return value, and the distance as a by reference argument to keep them properly separated?
