one more field in raw_node

Linux-mtd Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

* one more field in raw_node_ref ?
@ 2004-11-15  8:34 Artem B. Bityuckiy
  2004-11-15  8:46 ` David Woodhouse
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Artem B. Bityuckiy @ 2004-11-15  8:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-mtd

Hello guys,

I would be happy to know your opinions about to introduce one more 
32-bit field to the node_ref structure in the JFFS2. Is this really bad?

This means to increase the memory needed for in-core structures on 25% 
:-( I know, it sucks, but this would really simplify and improve the 
checkpoints processing...

Opinions?

Thanks.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem B. Bityuckiy,
St.-Petersburg, Russia.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: one more field in raw_node_ref ?
  2004-11-15  8:34 one more field in raw_node_ref ? Artem B. Bityuckiy
@ 2004-11-15  8:46 ` David Woodhouse
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: David Woodhouse @ 2004-11-15  8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Artem B. Bityuckiy; +Cc: linux-mtd

On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 11:34 +0300, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote:
> Hello guys,
> 
> I would be happy to know your opinions about to introduce one more 
> 32-bit field to the node_ref structure in the JFFS2. Is this really bad?

Yes but if you make a really good case for it and you finish the bits
which allow us to drop the length field we might let you get away with
it :)

-- 
dwmw2

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2004-11-15  8:46 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-11-15  8:34 one more field in raw_node_ref ? Artem B. Bityuckiy
2004-11-15  8:46 ` David Woodhouse

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox