Re: Regression in 5.1.20: Reading long directory fails
From: Benjamin Coddington
Date: Thu Sep 12 2019 - 09:35:12 EST
On 12 Sep 2019, at 9:25, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 09:13 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> (Unless I'm missing something. I haven't looked at this code in a
>> while. Though it was problem me that wrote it originally--apologies
> The function itself is fine. It was just the name I'm objecting to,
> since we're actually moving the last 'n' bytes in the message in order
> to be able to read them.
Ok, that's helpful guidance since it saves me from doing a stable fix and
then an attempt to rename/optimize/breakitagain.
I'll just rename it at the same time as the fix.. but now I wonder if that
can potentially mess up other fixes that might retroactively get sent to
stable. Maybe I'm over thinking it. I guess I'll send the fix and then the
rename separately, and maintainers can squash at will.