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

[Andrew Morton]

On Fri, 28 May 2010 22:14:32 +0100
Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 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?

That would be good.

> 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.

When adding wrappers we should also rename ->s_dirt (say, to __s_dirt)
to catch out any unconverted code.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/