On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 7:53 AM Christian Brauner
<christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Instead of naming all these $something_helper I would follow the
> underscore naming pattern we usually do, i.e. instead of e.g.
> rmdir_helper do __rmdir() or __do_rmdir().
That's certainly a pattern we have, but I don't necessarily love it.
It would be even better if we'd have names that actually explain
what/why the abstraction exists. In this case, it's the "possibly
retry due to ESTALE", but I have no idea how to sanely name that.
Making it "try_rmdir()" or something like that is the best I can come
up with right now.
On a similar note, the existing "do_rmdir()" and friends aren't
wonderful names either, but we expose that name out so changing it is
probably not worth it. But right now we have "vfs_rmdir()" and
"do_rmdir()", and they are just different levels of the "rmdir stack",
without the name really describing where in the stack they are.
Naming is hard, and I don't think the double underscores have been
wonderful either.
Linus
