Am 08.12.2014 um 14:00 schrieb Tanya Brokhman: >>>> Maybe the case you've described is powercut safe, but there can be other >>>> unsafe cases. >>>> Let's stay on the safe side and be paranoid, it does not hurt. >>>> If fastmap has proven stable we can start with tricky optimizations. >>> >>> I'm sorry that I'm being petty here but the commit msg states that you >>> "notify the user in case of update fastamap failure". It says nothing about >>> you failing ubi_wl_get_peb as >>> well. And this is a major change. At least divide this into 2 patches (so I >>> can disagree to the function failing and agree to the msg to user :) ) >> >> With user I meant users of that function. > > I still don't like it. > Leaving this one for Artem... sorry
As I said, as soon we all consider fastmap mature and stable we can start with optimizations. But as of now I want all logic to be on the safe side. This is how all fastmap code is designed. Thanks, //richard -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
