On martedì 26 luglio 2022 20:40:29 CEST Viacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > > > On Jul 25, 2022, at 10:54 AM, Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 10:17:13AM -0700, Viacheslav Dubeyko wrote: > >> Looks good. Maybe, it makes sense to combine all kmap() related modifications in HFS+ into > >> one patchset? > > > > For bisection, I'd think it best to leave them separate? > > I am OK with any way. My point that it will be good to have patchset to see all modified places together, from logical point of view. Even if we have some issue with kmap() change on kmap_local_page(), then, as far as I can see, the root of issue should be kmap_local_page() but not HFS+ code. Oppositely, if it’s some undiscovered HFS+ issue, then again kmap_local_page() changes nothing. But I am OK if it is separate patches too. > > Thanks, > Slava. > And I am OK with sending a patchset :-) I'm sorry because, while working on the last conversions for HFS+ in btree.c, I just noticed that I had overlooked one other kmap() call site in bitmap.c. Therefore, I'd like to ask to drop this patch and I'll also ask to drop the patch to bnode.c in the related thread. When done, I'll send a series of three patches, one per file (bnode.c, bitmap.c, btree.c). Thanks, Fabio
