On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 02:19:54PM -0400, Christopher Li wrote: > First thing first, I don't have strong reason to object this patch. > So it can be merge into RC5. OK, good. > > I would be fine with this patch (but it would need a bit more testing). > > I would be fine with no patch at all. > > I would be ok with your patch (the one with list duplication) but I > > think it's not a good one, even as a temporary bandaid (for the reasons > > I explained the first time I commented on it). > > Fair enough. Yes. I can apply it. The question is, do you want to remove > the duplicate set of API? (by testing "list->rm"). Sure but I think I will even not test anything at all. For the others lists we don't touch to the ->rm field and we have the guarantee that it will be initialized to zero so adding nr or adding (nr - rm) will be the same anyway (and doing the substraction certainly won't cost more than adding a test). -- Luc -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
