Re: [PATCHv4 01/17] VFS: introduce helpers for the s_dirty flag

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 01:23:18PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:

> A more conventional and superior naming scheme is
> subsystemid_specific_function_identifier().  eg, bio_add_page() instead
> of add_page_to_bio().
> 
> So these want to be sb_mark_dirty(), etc.
> 
> Being very old code written by very yound people, the VFS kinda ignores
> that convention, but it doesn't hurt to use it for new code.
> 
> Feel free to ignore me if that's too much of a PITA ;)

The real issue is that it's almost certainly an overdesign.  Let's
get rid of the bogus uses first and figure out what's happening in
what remains, OK?

I have no problems with doing such wrappers, but if we touch every
place using ->s_dirt anyway, let's at least take a good look at them.

I'm mostly OK with what had emerged for the final patch in series,
but...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux