On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:56 PM, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:21 PM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Going through patches:
>>
>> Regarding "fsnotify: use abstract fsnotify_obj_t * instead of **connp
>> argument" - I agree "struct fsnotify_mark_connector __rcu *" is quite
>> verbose but given how things evolved I don't think "fsnotify_obj_t" is a
>> great name. How about "fsnotify_connp_t" and keep parameter names as
>> "connp" instead of renaming them to "obj"? Because abstraction (like
>> pretending this is some kind of object when it is actually just a pointer)
>> that does not actually abstract anything is just obfuscation... So let's be
>> direct and admit this is just a shortcut name for connector pointer.
>>
>
> I though you'd say that and I agree.
> will rework after pull request.
Two places I couldn't resist keeping 'obj':
1. connector->obj
2. fsnotify_obj_{inode,mount}
The first one because conn->connp is horrible.
The second one because most call sites pass conn->obj as argument.
Force pushed result to fsnotify-cleanup.
See if you find it acceptable.
Thanks,
Amir.
