On 10/18/2016 10:54 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:01:42AM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: >> The ->rport_create callback only ever had a single implementation, >> so we can as well call it directly and drop the callback. >> >> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxxx> >> --- > > Any reason we can't rename fc_rport_create() with fc_remote_port_create() > so the scsi_transport_fc.c patch isn't needed? > Yes: consistency. Every function in libfc/fc_rport.c is named 'fc_rport_XXX'. So we should stick to that naming scheme here, too. scsi_transport_fc.c does not have such a strict naming scheme, so it's easier to rename that. Cheers, Hannes -- Dr. Hannes Reinecke Teamlead Storage & Networking hare@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 688 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: F. Imendörffer, J. Smithard, J. Guild, D. Upmanyu, G. Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
