On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:37 PM, David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:24:38PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote: >> Case (oper1->seq > oper2->seq) should differ with case (oper1->seq < oper2->seq). >> >> Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> > > and should go to stable@ if not to 4.1-rc as it's a bug in the core of > qgroups. Waiting for the next merge window would not buy us anything. Well, unless I missed something, it doesn't seem to cause any real harm as the only other search operation on the rbtree uses comp_oper_exist(), which totally ignores the seq field. Of course it should be fixed anyway as it's logic error likely due to copy-paste, but unlikely to fix any real user visible problem. > >> --- >> This typo was hiden in a big patch, so we need to work harder on review. > > Of course, lack of reviews that come from non-maintainers is a perpetual > problem. There are never too many and each is highly appreciated. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Filipe David Manana, "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
