Re: [PATCH -next 00/11] lib/interval-tree: move to half closed intervals

[Davidlohr Bueso]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2019, Matthew Wilcox wrote:

> 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.

Right, we should not have two implementations.

Thanks,
Davidlohr