From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 395C81F4B4 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726638AbhAMNF4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 08:05:56 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:54656 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725912AbhAMNF4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 08:05:56 -0500 Received: (qmail 22396 invoked by uid 109); 13 Jan 2021 13:05:15 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:05:15 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 29645 invoked by uid 111); 13 Jan 2021 13:05:15 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 08:05:15 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 08:05:15 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, jrnieder@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/20] pack-revindex: remove unused 'find_revindex_position()' Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:59:42AM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > > I notice these are signed ints, but we've taken care to use uint32_t > > elsewhere for positions. Shouldn't these be uint32_t, also (or at least > > unsigned)? > > I'll let both of these be an raw unsigned, since the midpoint is already > labeled as an unsigned. Yeah, I found that existing code doubly weird, since "mi" must by definition be bounded by "lo" and "hi". :) Looks like the bug was introduced in 92e5c77c37 (revindex: export new APIs, 2013-10-24), which hacked up the existing loop into a new function. We should have caught it then (back then we were a lot less careful about types, IMHO). Also, the subject line of that commit is giving me deja vu. ;) -Peff