On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 11:17:24AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Fri, 14 Jan 2022 22:49:59 +0000, "Kingsborough, Alex" <kingsboa@amazon.com> wrote in
>> The fix for this is very simple
>>
>>
>> /* if we wrote out all subxids, we're done. /
>> - if (j + 1 >= nsubxids)
>> + if (j >= nsubxids)
>> break;
>
> It looks like a thinko and the fix is correct. (It's a matter of taste
> choosing between it and "j == nsubxids").
It took me some time to understand the problem from the current code,
but I'd like to think that the suggested fix is less confusing.
> I found some confusing lines around but they need not a fix
> considering back-patching conflict?
>
>> for (i = 0, headxid = xid;;)
> ..
>> i += j - i + 1;
I am not sure. Do you have anything specific in mind? Perhaps
something that would help in making the code logic easier to follow?
--
Michael