Re: [PATCH 0/2] RFC: zswap tree use xarray instead of RB tree

[Johannes Weiner]

On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 11:05:15PM -0800, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > I think it makes the review easier. The code adding and removing does
> > not have much overlap. Combining it to a single patch does not save
> > patch size. Having the assert check would be useful for some bisecting
> > to narrow down which step causing the problem. I am fine with squash
> > it to one patch as well.
> 
> I think having two patches is unnecessarily noisy, and we add some
> debug code in this patch that we remove in the next patch anyway.
> Let's see what others think, but personally I prefer a single patch.

+1