On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > The more I look at that particular piece of code, the less I like it. It's > buggy shit. It needs to be rewritten entirely too actually check for sibling > entries, not that ad-hoc arithmetic crap. Here's my attempt at cleaning the mess up. I'm not claiming it's perfect, but I think it's better. It gets rid of the ad-hoc arithmetic in radix_tree_descend(), and just makes all that be inside the is_sibling_entry() logic instead. Which got renamed and made to actually return the main sibling. So now there is at least only *one* piece of code that does that range comparison, and I don't think there is any huge need to explain what's going on, because the "magic" is unconditional. Willy? Linus