On Fri, 04 Oct 2019, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 06:15:11AM -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
My take is that this (Davidlohr's) patch series does not necessarily
need to be applied all at once - we could get the first change in
(adding the interval_tree_gen.h header), and convert the first few
users, without getting them all at once, as long as we have a plan for
finishing the work. So, if you have cleanups in progress in some of
the files, just tell us which ones and we can leave them out from the
first pass.
Since we have users which do need to use the full ULONG_MAX range
(as pointed out by Christian Koenig), I don't think adding a second
implementation which is half-open is a good idea. It'll only lead to
confusion.
Right, we should not have two implementations.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
