On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 05:48:15PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 08:32:40PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 05:37:53PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 09:27:49AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > First thing I noticed was that "xa" as a prefix is already quite > > > > widely used in XFS - it's shorthand for "XFS AIL". Indeed, xa_lock > > > > The X stands for 'eXpandable' or 'eXtending'. I really don't want to > > use more than a two-letter acronym for whatever the XArray ends up being > > called. One of the problems with the radix tree is that everything has > > that 11-character 'radix_tree_' prefix; just replacing that with 'xa_' > > makes a huge improvement to readability. > > Yeah, understood. That's why > we have very little clear > prefix namespace left.... :/ > > [ somedays I write something that looks sorta like a haiku, and from > that point on everything just starts falling out of my brain that > way. I blame Eric for this today! :P ] When the namespace is tight we must consider the competing users. The earliest us'r has a claim to a prefix we are used to it. Also a more wide- spread user has a claim to a shorter prefix. Would you mind changing your prefix to one only one letter longer? ... ok, I give up ;-) All your current usage of the xa_ prefix looks somewhat like this: fs/xfs/xfs_trans_ail.c: spin_lock(&ailp->xa_lock); with honourable mentions to: fs/xfs/xfs_log.c: spin_lock(&mp->m_ail->xa_lock); Would you mind if I bolt a patch on to the front of the series called something like "free up xa_ namespace" that renamed your xa_* to ail_*? There are no uses of the 'ail_' prefix in the kernel today. I don't think that spin_lock(&ailp->ail_lock); loses any readability. By the way, what does AIL stand for? It'd be nice if it were spelled out in at least one of the header files, maybe fs/xfs/xfs_trans_priv.h? > Zoetrope Array. > Labyrinth of illusion. > Structure never ends. Thank you for making me look up zoetrope ;-)
