[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1512101745360.9922@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 17:47:19 +0100 (CET)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Geliang Tang <geliangtang@....com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
coreteam@...filter.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] list: introduce list_is_first()
On Thu, 10 Dec 2015, Jens Axboe wrote:
> It's a balance, as we also should not make APIs out of everything. As I said,
> purely my opinion, but I think the is_last/is_first have jumped the shark.
I don't have a strong opinion either way.
What I think we should do though, is to either have both (i.e accept this
patchset) or have neither of them (i.e. drop list_is_last()).
Otherwise people are likely to be confused by such an asymetric API and
will keep posting patches for it over and over again.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists