[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250915-anlocken-brummen-b86b3cba8ccf@brauner>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 14:21:56 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Joseph Qi <joseph.qi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Mark Tinguely <mark.tinguely@...cle.com>, ocfs2-devel@...ts.linux.dev, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, josef@...icpanda.com,
jlbec@...lplan.org, mark@...heh.com, willy@...radead.org, david@...morbit.com
Subject: Re: [External] : [PATCH] ocfs2: retire ocfs2_drop_inode() and
I_WILL_FREE usage
On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 11:57:11AM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 11:52 AM Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 11:51 AM Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon 08-09-25 17:39:22, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> > > > I think generic_delete_inode is a really bad name for what the routine
> > > > is doing and it perhaps contributes to the confusion in the thread.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps it could be renamed to inode_op_stub_always_drop or similar? I
> > > > don't for specifics, apart from explicitly stating that the return
> > > > value is to drop and bonus points for a prefix showing this is an
> > > > inode thing.
> > >
> > > I think inode_always_drop() would be fine...
> >
> > sgtm. unfortunately there are quite a few consumers, so I don't know
> > if this is worth the churn and consequently I'm not going for it.
> >
> > But should you feel inclined... ;-)
>
> Actually got one better: inode_just_drop(), so that it is clear this
> is not doing anything else.
That's a simple git sed tbh. Just send it to me this week. All big
changes should be done by now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists