From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42561C433E1 for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 06:46:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A177205CB for ; Wed, 20 May 2020 06:46:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726474AbgETGqp (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2020 02:46:45 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:47988 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726224AbgETGqp (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2020 02:46:45 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 5F24968B02; Wed, 20 May 2020 08:46:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 08:46:43 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] xfs: hide most of the incore inode walk interface Message-ID: <20200520064643.GK2742@lst.de> References: <158993911808.976105.13679179790848338795.stgit@magnolia> <158993918698.976105.6231244252663510379.stgit@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <158993918698.976105.6231244252663510379.stgit@magnolia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 06:46:27PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong > > Hide the incore inode walk interface because callers outside of the > icache code don't need to know about iter_flags and radix tags and other > implementation details of the incore inode cache. I don't really see the point here. It isn't hiding much, and only from a single caller. I have to say I also prefer the old naming over _ici_ and find the _all postfix not exactly descriptive.