New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
osd: Use specializations, typedefs instead #19354
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Shinobu Kinjo <shinobu@redhat.com>
@@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ class OSDService { | |||
|
|||
private: | |||
/// throttle promotion attempts | |||
std::atomic_uint promote_probability_millis{1000}; ///< probability thousands. one word. | |||
std::atomic<unsigned int> promote_probability_millis{1000}; ///< probability thousands. one word. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what's the rationale behind this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@shinobu-x ping?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
adding @chardan
i don't feel strong either way. i just don't think we want to add code churn for no reason or just completely based on personal preference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@shinobu-x I have the same question as Kefu. The standard template specializations are well-defined, eg. std::atomic_uint is already exactly std::atomic.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@shinobu-x Also, the title might need rewording, since this change /stops/ using typedef-ed specializations, the opposite of what it suggests.
@shinobu-x @tchaikov I'm still unclear on the purpose of this change. |
Signed-off-by: Shinobu Kinjo shinobu@redhat.com