From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/11] inode: convert per-sb inode list to a list_lru Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 11:06:16 +1000 Message-ID: <20130802010616.GS7118@dastard> References: <1375244150-27296-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1375244150-27296-9-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20130801081950.GA18828@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, davej@redhat.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, jack@suse.cz, glommer@parallels.com To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130801081950.GA18828@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 01:19:50AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > At this point the list_lru name really becomes confusing. Given that > it's not really LRU specific maybe just rename it to pernode_list > or similar? Well, such things were suggested when the list_lru was first proposed. Indeed, it even lived in lib/ because I saw it as widely useful. But akpm didn't like it because of the "structure with internal locking" architecture and thought it was too purpose specific for generic use and so it got moved uot of lib/ into mm/ and here we are. I don't care for how it's named, located or used - I just want to be able to use the infrastructure it provides. As such renaming and relocating it is not something I'm about to do in this specific patchset.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com