Re: [RFC PATCH 01/21] block: add and use init tagset helper

[Chaitanya Kulkarni]

On 10/5/22 09:54, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 10/5/22 02:47, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 at 07:11, Damien Le Moal 
>> <damien.lemoal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 10/5/22 12:22, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>>>> +void blk_mq_init_tag_set(struct blk_mq_tag_set *set,
>>>> +             const struct blk_mq_ops *ops, unsigned int nr_hw_queues,
>>>> +             unsigned int queue_depth, unsigned int cmd_size, int 
>>>> numa_node,
>>>> +             unsigned int timeout, unsigned int flags, void 
>>>> *driver_data)
>>>
>>> That is an awful lot of arguments... I would be tempted to say pack all
>>> these into a struct but then that would kind of negate this patchset 
>>> goal.
>>> Using a function with that many arguments will be error prone, and 
>>> hard to
>>> review... Not a fan.
>>
>> I completely agree.
>>
>> But there is also another problem going down this route. If/when we
>> realize that there is another parameter needed in the blk_mq_tag_set.
>> Today that's quite easy to add (assuming the parameter can be
>> optional), without changing the blk_mq_init_tag_set() interface.
> 
> Hi Chaitanya,
> 
> Please consider to drop the entire patch series. In addition to the 
> disadvantages mentioned above I'd like to mention the following 
> disadvantages:
> * Replacing named member assignments with positional arguments in a
>    function call makes code harder to read and harder to verify.
> * This patch series makes tree-wide changes without improving the code
>    in a substantial way.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.
> 

Thanks for the feedback, will drop it.

-ck