On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 02:17:06PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Kent. > > I've been reading the code and am still very far from understanding > the whole thing but here are general impressions upto this point. > > * I started reading from get_bucket(), mostly because I wasn't sure > where to start. It would be very helpful to the reviewers and > future participants if there's a design doc and more comments (much > more). The code is on the big side and the problem is exacerbated > by use of somewhat unconventional constructs and conventions and > lack of documentation and comments. I totally agreed. There is a lot going on and design doc is going to help a lot while reviewing. > * Too many smart macros. Macros suck. Smart ones double suck. I had the same impression when I tried to read the code last. Too many macros and it makes reading code really difficult. [..] > * Somewhat related to the above, I'm not a fan of super-verbose > symbols but I *hope* that the variable names were just a tiny bit > more descriptive. At least, the ones used as arguments. Another thing is that keep variable names consistent. Last time I looked, same name "c" was being used to represent cached_dev or cache_set or something else too. If we keep variable name same to represent same data structure, it becomes easier to read the code. I was totally lost and always had to go back to figure out what "c" is representing, what "d" is representing etc. Thanks Vivek -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
