From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:40947 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750732AbdAWRyi (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:54:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:54:19 +0100 From: David Sterba To: Qu Wenruo Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] btrfs-progs: convert: Switch to new rollback function Message-ID: <20170123175419.GQ11951@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz References: <20161219065642.25078-1-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> <20161219065642.25078-6-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20161219065642.25078-6-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 02:56:41PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > Since we have the whole facilities needed to rollback, switch to the new > rollback. Sorry, the change from patch 4 to patch 5 seems too big to grasp for me, reviewing is really hard and I'm not sure I could even do that. My concern is namely about patch 5/6 that throws out a lot of code that does not obviously map to the new code. I can try again to see if there are points where the patch could be split, but at the moment the patchset is too scary to merge.