On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 09:40:20AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:53:15PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > > and fixing the bug differently ;-) But many thanks for spotting it! > > I thought you might :) The xas_* functions are all _expected_ to behave the same way when passed an XA_STATE containing an error -- do nothing. xas_create_range() behaved that way initially, then I fixed a bug and broke that invariant. Now the test suite checks it so I won't break it again. > > I'll look into the next bug you reported ... > > No need: that idea now works a lot better when I use the initialized > "start", instead of the uninitialized "index". Ugh. xas_create_range() is _supposed_ to return with xas pointing to the first index in the range. I wonder what I messed up. I've had a go at producing a test-case for this and haven't provoked a bug yet. Still, I don't want to keep xas_create_range() around long-term. I want to transition all the places that currently use it to use multi-index entries. So I'm going to put your workaround in and then work on deleting xas_create_range() altogether. Thanks so much for all your work on this!
