| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Not sure if there is any downsides to this, but I think this is much simpler and pretty much identical. Plus, I don't quite like that the 1.25 factor could be large, although I admit it seems very unlikely (maybe impossible) to actually trigger a problem there. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Berg <sebastianb@nvidia.com>
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Backport of #29885.
Not sure if there is any downsides to this, but I think this is much simpler and pretty much identical.
Plus, I don't quite like that the 1.25 factor could be large, although I admit it seems very unlikely (maybe impossible) to actually trigger a problem there.
EDIT: As a note, I have a similar function that caps overallocation and increments in "neat" values (which double as a minimum overallocation amount). I somewhat assumed that doesn't matter much, but we could definitely do either or both here as well.