Re: [PATCH v1] iomap: simplify iomap_iter_advance()

[Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>]

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 07:31:33AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> IME the __iomap_iter_advance() would be the most low level and flexible
> version, whereas the wrappers simplify things. There's also the point
> that the wrapper seems the more common case, so maybe that makes things
> cleaner if that one is used more often.
> 
> But TBH I'm not sure there is strong precedent. I'm content if we can
> retain the current variant for the callers that take advantage of it.
> Another idea is you could rename the current function to
> iomap_iter_advance_and_update_length_for_loopy_callers() and see what
> alternative suggestions come up. ;)

Yeah, __ names are a bit nasty.  I prefer to mostly limit them to
local helpers, or to things with an obvious inline wrapper for the
fast path.  So I your latest suggestions actually aims in the right
directly, but maybe we can shorten the name a little and do something
like:

iomap_iter_advance_and_update_len

although even that would probably lead a few lines to spill.
iomap_iter_advance_len would be a shorter, but a little more confusing,
but still better than __-naming, so maybe it should be fine with a good
kerneldoc comment?