linux-doc.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Timur Tabi <ttabi@nvidia.com>
Cc: "corbet@lwn.net" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	"rdunlap@infradead.org" <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: debugfs: do not recommend debugfs_remove_recursive
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 09:30:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2025043059-lustfully-endurable-0efc@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <758ad68deb989eaf8a22ac2bd96915bed77f0f4a.camel@nvidia.com>

On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 06:24:40PM +0000, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-04-29 at 19:47 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > No, the other way around, we should be telling people to use
> > debugfs_remove_recursive() instead please, and getting rid of
> > debugfs_remove() entirely.
> 
> Then why was 
> 
> 	#define debugfs_remove_recursive debugfs_remove
> 
> added back in 2019, and why was that functionality *added* to debugfs_remove?

So we didn't have 2 functions that did the same thing and no one wanted
to sweep the tree and rename everything at that time?  I honestly don't
remember, that was tens of thousands of patches ago :)

> I recently added a patch to Nouveau that used debugfs_remove() to clean up all debugfs entries
> specifically because it operates recursively.

That's great, I'm not objecting to that, just that we need to stick with
one or the other and I'd prefer the "recursive" name as that makes it
blindingly obvious what is happening here while without it, people can
get confused.

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-30 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-29 17:39 [PATCH] docs: debugfs: do not recommend debugfs_remove_recursive Timur Tabi
2025-04-29 17:47 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2025-04-29 18:24   ` Timur Tabi
2025-04-30  7:30     ` gregkh [this message]
2025-04-30 14:27       ` Timur Tabi
2025-04-30 14:57         ` gregkh
2025-04-30 16:36           ` Timur Tabi
2025-04-30 17:10             ` gregkh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2025043059-lustfully-endurable-0efc@gregkh \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=ttabi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).