Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Nov 2023 07:40:39 +0300 | From | Vasily Averin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] zram: extra zram_get_element call in zram_read_from_zspool() |
| |
On 11/8/23 06:32, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (23/11/08 06:16), Vasily Averin wrote: >> On 11/8/23 05:49, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: >>> On (23/11/06 22:55), Vasily Averin wrote: >>>> >>>> 'element' and 'handle' are union in struct zram_table_entry. >>>> >>>> Fixes: 8e19d540d107 ("zram: extend zero pages to same element pages") >>> >>> Sorry, what exactly does it fix? >> >> It removes unneeded call of zram_get_element() and unneeded variable 'value'. > > Yes, what the patch does is pretty clear. It doesn't *fix* anything per se.
Ok, I'm sorry for miscommunication. I'm agree, it is just minor cleanup. "Fixes:" tag just here was pointed to the patch added this problem. Perhaps it was better to specify something like "Introduced-by:" tag instead.
>> zram_get_element() == zram_get_handle(), they both access the same field of the same struct zram_table_entry, >> no need to read it 2nd time. >> 'value' variable is not required, 'handle' can be used instead. >> >> I hope this explain why element/handle union should be removed: it confuses reviewers. > > I do not agree with "union should be removed" part. > > In this particular case - using handle as the page pattern (element) > is in fact quite confusing. The visual separation of `handle` and `element` > is helpful.
It's at your discretion, you know better.
Thank you, Vasily Averin
| |