On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 05:09:07AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:48:38PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 07:34:24AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > xfs_bmap_rtalloc is currently in xfs_bmap_util.c, which is a somewhat > > > odd spot for it, given that is only called from xfs_bmap.c and calls > > > into xfs_rtalloc.c to do the actual work. Move xfs_bmap_rtalloc to > > > xfs_rtalloc.c and mark xfs_rtpick_extent xfs_rtallocate_extent and > > > xfs_rtallocate_extent static now that they aren't called from outside > > > of xfs_rtalloc.c. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > > > I never understood why xfs_bmap_rtalloc was there either, aside from the > > namespacing. But even then, xfs_rtalloc_bmap? > > Fine with me.. Actually.. Given that it purely is a block allocator and doesn't do any bmapping at all, the _bmap postfix is rather odd. Something like xfs_rtallocate_extent would fit better, but the name only becomes available after the last patch.
