linux-kernel - 回复: [PATCH] block: mq-deadline: rename sort_list to sort

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 5 Jul 2023 00:30:46 +0000
From:   李培锋(wink) <lipeifeng@...o.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>
CC:     "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        张诗明(Simon Zhang) 
        <zhangshiming@...o.com>, 郭健 <guojian@...o.com>
Subject: 回复: [PATCH] block: mq-deadline: rename sort_list to sort_rb

>> Mq-deadline would store request in list:fifo_list and 
>> rb_tree:sort_list, and sort_list should be renamed to sort_rb which is 
>> beneficial for understanding.

>Huh? I think this patch makes the code less readable instead of more readable ...

Huh? Maybe we had different opinions about it, I thinks the essence of this word is 'sort'
So that reader can get the meaning of it easily. And in my mind, *_rb is more reasonable
for rb_root ratherthan *_list for reader.

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> 
发送时间: 2023年7月4日 22:13
收件人: 李培锋(wink) <lipeifeng@...o.com>; axboe@...nel.dk
抄送: linux-block@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; 张诗明(Simon Zhang) <zhangshiming@...o.com>; 郭健 <guojian@...o.com>
主题: Re: [PATCH] block: mq-deadline: rename sort_list to sort_rb

On 7/3/23 21:06, lipeifeng@...o.com wrote:
> Mq-deadline would store request in list:fifo_list and 
> rb_tree:sort_list, and sort_list should be renamed to sort_rb which is 
> beneficial for understanding.

Huh? I think this patch makes the code less readable instead of more readable ...

Bart.