[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v4 08/10] nbd/server: introduce NBDExtentArray

From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/10] nbd/server: introduce NBDExtentArray
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 10:44:40 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1

27.02.2020 16:21, Eric Blake wrote:
On 2/27/20 6:46 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
26.02.2020 18:06, Eric Blake wrote:
On 2/5/20 5:20 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
Introduce NBDExtentArray class, to handle extents list creation in more
controlled way and with fewer OUT parameters in functions.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <address@hidden>
  nbd/server.c | 210 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
  1 file changed, 118 insertions(+), 92 deletions(-)

+/* Further modifications of the array after conversion are abandoned */
+static void nbd_extent_array_convert_to_be(NBDExtentArray *ea)
+    int i;
+    assert(!ea->converted_to_be);

Comment is stale - further modifications after conversion are a bug that aborts 
the program, not abandoned.

I always thought that "abandoned" is something that must not be done, so the 
word works here. But I don't know English well).

Rephrasing my comment, further modifications are "a bug that aborts the program", rather 
than "an ignored action that gets abandoned".

May be:

"No further modifications of the array allowed after converting to BE."?

Yes, that wording is better.

Is it better?

Or just drop the comment.

That's also viable; the code reads fairly well even without the comment.

OK, let's just drop it.

Best regards,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]