[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100528211432.GM31073@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 22:14:32 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
"Tigran A. Aivazian" <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
reiserfs-devel@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Evgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@...l.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 01/17] VFS: introduce helpers for the s_dirty flag
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 01:23:18PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> A more conventional and superior naming scheme is
> subsystemid_specific_function_identifier(). eg, bio_add_page() instead
> of add_page_to_bio().
>
> So these want to be sb_mark_dirty(), etc.
>
> Being very old code written by very yound people, the VFS kinda ignores
> that convention, but it doesn't hurt to use it for new code.
>
> Feel free to ignore me if that's too much of a PITA ;)
The real issue is that it's almost certainly an overdesign. Let's
get rid of the bogus uses first and figure out what's happening in
what remains, OK?
I have no problems with doing such wrappers, but if we touch every
place using ->s_dirt anyway, let's at least take a good look at them.
I'm mostly OK with what had emerged for the final patch in series,
but...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists