From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51940C47404 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 16:03:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF5F215EA for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 16:03:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="UtT5E80f" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DDF5F215EA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 4A0206B0003; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 12:03:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 42A4C6B0005; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 12:03:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2F2DC6B0007; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 12:03:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0178.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.178]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 068AE6B0003 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 12:03:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin11.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8580B181AC9B4 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 16:03:56 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76006573272.11.wren61_53d60c60c948 X-HE-Tag: wren61_53d60c60c948 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2869 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 16:03:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=6bnnMnywYc1KPMDxc8Uzb+dKxSoXRZCe+CE3Bai6Kig=; b=UtT5E80fTfG3N3Zhy/JcUm0s9 6fAQ+GfAQ1fWDBVlo4KlV/uXeLNhhh2xwUmdjTM2lFq/54r+Kuo3J+GcgzVx9ge+yDsxlA3wcS5Tj 6TSx6InmuT8BRMhmzFleM0ykBWvU72vyMh9sS01g1CuKImZltMQFUG5iWqiX7iZoG/ZVs9sMorDk0 MdRkZxZqgvULDXblBpojXUTTrVWrS/ikRT48b0y6P8ofphz3Z7VJMROz69AWXbOdXOtpPOidh1Wz/ 0UUubi6OQAcZbPltXYZDJmlXKugsL20OQsnIcgCAPENPzN+eVej+PIhBO/4vGlujvnPMjZ/6zPdNe o9FOXgO1g==; Received: from willy by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.92.2 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1iGQ3X-00030a-VP; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 16:03:47 +0000 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 09:03:47 -0700 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Michel Lespinasse Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Davidlohr Bueso , Andrew Morton , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , linux-mm , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 00/11] lib/interval-tree: move to half closed intervals Message-ID: <20191004160347.GH32665@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20191003201858.11666-1-dave@stgolabs.net> <20191004002609.GB1492@ziepe.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: 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.