From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757137F52 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 12:36:25 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6363A30408F for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:36:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [195.92.253.2]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id AYAizahoJakCghoW (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 10:36:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:36:09 +0000 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [RFC] unifying write variants for filesystems Message-ID: <20140204183609.GK10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20140120135514.GA21567@infradead.org> <20140201224301.GS10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <52EFC271.3090205@oracle.com> <20140204124409.GG10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140204125220.GB12440@kmo-pixel> <20140204151728.GH10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140204172723.GA11325@lenny.home.zabbo.net> <20140204180040.GI10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140204183356.GB11325@lenny.home.zabbo.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140204183356.GB11325@lenny.home.zabbo.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Zach Brown Cc: Jens Axboe , Steve French , Sage Weil , Mark Fasheh , xfs@oss.sgi.com, Christoph Hellwig , Kent Overstreet , Dave Kleikamp , Joel Becker , linux-fsdevel , Linus Torvalds , Anton Altaparmakov On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 10:33:56AM -0800, Zach Brown wrote: > > > > BTW, folks, any suggestions about the name of that "memory stream" thing? > > > > struct iov_iter really implies iterator for iovec and more generic name > > > > would probably be better... struct mem_stream would probably do if nobody > > > > comes up with better variant, but it's long and somewhat clumsy... > > > > > > I don't like 'stream'. To me that sounds more strictly advancing than I > > > think this'd be capable of. Maybe something dirt simple like 'mem_vec'? > > > With 'mvec_' call prefixes? > > > > Umm... Frankly, I would rather discourage attempts to read the same data > > twice, if only on the naming level... > > Ahh, OK, sure. mem_iter? Works for me... Any other suggestions/objections/etc.? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Viro Subject: Re: [RFC] unifying write variants for filesystems Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:36:09 +0000 Message-ID: <20140204183609.GK10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20140120135514.GA21567@infradead.org> <20140201224301.GS10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <52EFC271.3090205@oracle.com> <20140204124409.GG10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140204125220.GB12440@kmo-pixel> <20140204151728.GH10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140204172723.GA11325@lenny.home.zabbo.net> <20140204180040.GI10323@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20140204183356.GB11325@lenny.home.zabbo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Kent Overstreet , Linus Torvalds , Christoph Hellwig , Jens Axboe , Mark Fasheh , Joel Becker , linux-fsdevel , xfs@oss.sgi.com, Sage Weil , Steve French , Anton Altaparmakov , Dave Kleikamp To: Zach Brown Return-path: Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:44373 "EHLO ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754569AbaBDSgX (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2014 13:36:23 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140204183356.GB11325@lenny.home.zabbo.net> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 10:33:56AM -0800, Zach Brown wrote: > > > > BTW, folks, any suggestions about the name of that "memory stream" thing? > > > > struct iov_iter really implies iterator for iovec and more generic name > > > > would probably be better... struct mem_stream would probably do if nobody > > > > comes up with better variant, but it's long and somewhat clumsy... > > > > > > I don't like 'stream'. To me that sounds more strictly advancing than I > > > think this'd be capable of. Maybe something dirt simple like 'mem_vec'? > > > With 'mvec_' call prefixes? > > > > Umm... Frankly, I would rather discourage attempts to read the same data > > twice, if only on the naming level... > > Ahh, OK, sure. mem_iter? Works for me... Any other suggestions/objections/etc.?