On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 06:45:35PM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>
> >> @@ -875,6 +877,24 @@ static void null_free_sector(struct nullb *nullb, sector_t sector,
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static void null_zero_sector(struct nullb_device *d, sector_t sect,
> >> + sector_t nr_sects, bool cache)
> >> +{
> >
> > Any reason to not just pass the tree root directly here instead of the
> > cache boolean? It might make the callers more readable and also
> > eliminates the need to pass the nullb_device.
> >
> > Brian
> >
>
> I kept the style similar to null_free_sector() where root is calculated
> inside the helper acting on the sector, if we change that for
> null_zero_sector() then I think we need to change for null_free_sector()
> for consistency, unless you strongly object it for some reason.
>
Nope, just a nit that stood out to me when skimming the patches. Not a
big deal at all.
Brian
> -ck
>
