linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Staging: lustre: Refactor the function interval_erase_color() in /lustre/ldlm/interval

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAFB2WuX7AwwDNx-UkT5G-bDWjWuMZTVtycJ+j9PoyuMvyMn56g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:39:02 +0530
From:	Monam Agarwal <monamagarwal123@...il.com>
To:	"Xiong, Jinshan" <jinshan.xiong@...el.com>,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
	"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
	"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Staging: lustre: Refactor the function
 interval_erase_color() in /lustre/ldlm/interval_tree.c

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Xiong, Jinshan <jinshan.xiong@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 11:56 PM, Dilger, Andreas <andreas.dilger@...el.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Staging: lustre: Refactor the function interval_erase_color() in /lustre/ldlm/interval_tree.c
>>> Date: January 11, 2014 at 1:33:58 PM MST
>>> To: Monam Agarwal <monamagarwal123@...il.com>
>>> Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, <andreas.dilger@...el.com>, <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@...il.com>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 05:14:35PM +0530, Monam Agarwal wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 04:56:44PM +0530, Monam Agarwal wrote:
>>>>>> I took n as a flag to decide whether parent->in_left == node is true
>>>>>> or not in the called function.
>>>>>
>>>>> So "n" stands for "node"?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Should I use some other name for the flag.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Will "flag" be a suitable name?
>
> I’d suggest `bool is_right_child’.
>
> I’ve checked the patch and it looks good. There exists a unit test case for interval tree under lustre/tests/ named it_test.c, please compile it and verify your change.
>
I am using tree from
http://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git/.
There is no lustre/tests folder in my tree and no file named
it_test.c.
Kindly let me know the tree you are working from.

> Jinshan
>
>>>
>>> Ick, no.  You don't want a "flag" to have to determine what the logic is
>>> for a given function.  That just causes confusion and makes things
>>> really hard to read and understand over time.
>>>
>>> This whole function looks like a red/black tree, or something like that.
>>> Shouldn't we just be using the in-kernel implementation of this?  And if
>>> not, then you really need to get the feedback of the code's original
>>> authors as you might be changing the algorithm in ways that could cause
>>> big problems.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> greg k-h
>>
>> Cheers, Andreas
>> --
>> Andreas Dilger
>> Lustre Software Architect
>> Intel Corporation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/