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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84975C77B72 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:21:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229866AbjDNOVB (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Apr 2023 10:21:01 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45556 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229703AbjDNOU6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Apr 2023 10:20:58 -0400 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA1AD3A84; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 07:20:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B82D1FD9D; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:20:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1681482053; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=iZkdt1gYLF7v3yMr48JgLmFQRizKTdgKhTurZyh+1ng=; b=vda8SM4e21JGahk64/0RzIKft+1YjY8j8i6coNntqQFTvwplaj8Cl1M0+bZTgYqeCDrRk7 j3YJlWA2ynG7RCfb4dVY92yHbw0dF4MO3RCHFCfAn+El8na85/17QHIsg7TMOP1d3cIl4z qpcRBD16NOz4uynvKqurcODFXpfbbPg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1681482053; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=iZkdt1gYLF7v3yMr48JgLmFQRizKTdgKhTurZyh+1ng=; b=Foqn863JnmLcwegMHkGCaWS9wRAJbInPzyqIR+3SmPOAprYqFwCgffLw7lMIpkT/vGAeCj FRxxDC+UovqpK5Dw== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AF9513498; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:20:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id nkbmIUVhOWR2IwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 14 Apr 2023 14:20:53 +0000 Received: by quack3.suse.cz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 19D28A0732; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:20:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 16:20:53 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Jan Kara , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, "Darrick J . Wong" , Ojaswin Mujoo , Disha Goel Subject: Re: [RFCv3 02/10] libfs: Add __generic_file_fsync_nolock implementation Message-ID: <20230414142053.gvekvcgxmkjfeht7@quack3> References: <20230414125148.du7r6ljdyzckoysh@quack3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org On Fri 14-04-23 06:12:00, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2023 at 02:51:48PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Thu 13-04-23 22:59:24, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Still no fan of the naming and placement here. This is specific > > > to the fs/buffer.c infrastructure. > > > > I'm fine with moving generic_file_fsync() & friends to fs/buffer.c and > > creating the new function there if it makes you happier. But I think > > function names should be consistent (hence the new function would be named > > __generic_file_fsync_nolock()). I agree the name is not ideal and would use > > cleanup (along with transitioning everybody to not take i_rwsem) but I > > don't want to complicate this series by touching 13+ callsites of > > generic_file_fsync() and __generic_file_fsync(). That's for a separate > > series. > > I would not change the existing function. Just do the right thing for > the new helper and slowly migrate over without complicating this series. OK, I can live with that temporary naming inconsistency I guess. So the function will be __buffer_file_fsync()? Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR