On 2019/3/21 6:20 下午, Nix wrote: > The logic seems sound... but the subject: > > On 2 Mar 2019, Coly Li verbalised: > >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 3/6] bcache: never set 0 to KEY_PTRS of jouranl key in journal_reclaim() > >> will set 0 to KEY_PTRS field of c->journal.key. > > In English, 'set KEY_PTRS field of c->journal.key to 0' and 'set 0 to > KEY_PTRS field of c->journal.key' are not equivalent: the latter refers > to changing the value of the *number 0*, which is impossible. > Wow, thanks for pointing out this, I will fix it in next RFC version. Good to know this :-) -- Coly Li
