From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Waiman Long Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:43:54 -0400 Subject: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH v6 2/2] block_dev: Rename bd_fsfreeze_mutex In-Reply-To: <20170918234745.GA8600@infradead.org> References: <1505760831-7747-1-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <1505760831-7747-3-git-send-email-longman@redhat.com> <20170918234745.GA8600@infradead.org> Message-ID: <9c144de1-72bc-50b8-b828-afe7a5d371aa@redhat.com> List-Id: To: cluster-devel.redhat.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 09/18/2017 07:47 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Don't rename it to a way to long name. Either add a separate mutex > for your purpose (unless there is interaction between freezing and > blktrace, which I doubt), or properly comment the usage. I would agree with you if the long name causes the expressions hard to read. In this particular case, it is just the single parameter to the mutex_lock() and mutex_unlock() functions. There is no confusion and overly long lines. So I think it is OK. In fact, I got the opposite advices in the past that some people prefer long descriptive names than short and cryptic names. Cheers, Longman