Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] read-cache: leave lock in right state in `write_locked_index()`

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Martin Ågren <martin.agren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On 6 October 2017 at 04:01, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Martin Ågren <martin.agren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> v2: Except for the slightly different documentation in cache.h, this is
>>> a squash of the last two patches of v1. I hope the commit message is
>>> better.
>>
>> Yeah, it is long ;-) but readable.
>
> "Long but readable"... Yeah. When I rework the previous patch (document
> the closing-behavior of `do_write_index()`) I could address this. I
> think there are several interesting details here and I'm not sure which
> I'd want to leave out, but yeah, they add up...

I didn't mean "long is bad" at all in this case.  

Certainly, from time to time we find commits with overlong
explanation that only states obvious, and they are "long and bad".
But I do not think this one falls into the same category as those.






[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux