On 6/7/22 17:03, Hanna Reitz wrote:
On 30.03.22 23:28, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
We are going to reimplement this behavior (clear bs->file / bs->backing
pointers automatically when child->bs is cleared) in a nicer way.
This reverts commit b0a9f6fed3d80de610dcd04a7e66f9f30a04174f.
This doesn’t really explain why it’s fine to revert this commit here. As far as
I understand, the bug that was fixed in that commit will resurface when it is
reverted without the proposed reimplementation, so technically, we cannot
revert before reimplementing.
As far as I can guess, it’d be unwieldy to do the reimplementation while these
existing changes are in the way, and it’d be one bomb of a patch to squash
these five patches (9 to 14) into one, and that’s why you’ve chosen to do it
this way around.
Yes, that's the reason
But technically, we can’t willingly break something just to keep patches nicer.
We can make exceptions, but then there needs to be justification here in the
commit message.
Agree, will add.
As far as I remember (and after re-reading commit message) b0a9f6fed3d80de610dc
was not a direct fix of some concrete bug. It was a measure to prevent
theoretic problems. And we don't have any test for it. So I think, breaking
bisect at this point for some future test is not too bad.
(Or perhaps I’m wrong and it is fine at this point to revert the patch, but
then I’d like to see the explanation for that, too, because I can’t see it
myself.)
Hanna
--
Best regards,
Vladimir