From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932782AbaEMJIQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 May 2014 05:08:16 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:6574 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932281AbaEMJIN (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 May 2014 05:08:13 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,1042,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="539485386" Message-ID: <1399972089.1797.29.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] UBI: fix rb_tree node comparison in add_map From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com To: Brian Norris Cc: Richard Weinberger , Mike Snitzer , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 12:08:09 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20140510011913.GH28907@ld-irv-0074> References: <20140321195403.GA32529@redhat.com> <532CD1CB.4070707@nod.at> <20140510011913.GH28907@ld-irv-0074> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-2.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 18:19 -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Artem, > > On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 12:56:59AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > Am 21.03.2014 20:54, schrieb Mike Snitzer: > > > The comparisons used in add_vol() shouldn't be identical. Pretty sure > > > the following is correct but it is completely untested. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer > > > --- > > > drivers/mtd/ubi/fastmap.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > NOTE: I stumbled upon this code while implementing some rb_tree code > > > (and looking for some existing rb_tree code as a reference). > > > > Thanks a lot for pointing this out! > > > > Acked-by: Richard Weinberger > > Bump? > > I'm passing through my queue, and I occasionally see some obvious, > reviewed fixes like this one. Typically, you get around to them > eventually, but you never know. Do you prefer the "bump"? I'll pick this now, thanks for pointing. And yes, a "bump" is helpful. E.g., I missed this ones. -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy