From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 10/63] xarray: Add xa_for_each To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox , Jan Kara , Jeff Layton , Lukas Czerner , Ross Zwisler , Christoph Hellwig , Nicholas Piggin , Ryusuke Konishi , linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org, Jaegeuk Kim , Chao Yu , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Oleg Drokin , Andreas Dilger , James Simmons , Mike Kravetz References: <20180414141316.7167-1-willy@infradead.org> <20180414141316.7167-11-willy@infradead.org> <35a3318d-69d7-a10c-1515-98ea6b59fb99@suse.de> <20180421013406.GM10788@bombadil.infradead.org> From: Goldwyn Rodrigues Message-ID: <3c759f62-a1fa-9bdd-9b02-7c4e1d2b3adb@suse.de> Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2018 15:33:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180421013406.GM10788@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On 04/20/2018 08:34 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 07:00:47AM -0500, Goldwyn Rodrigues wrote: >> This function name sounds like you are performing the operation for each >> tag. >> >> Can it be called xas_for_each_tagged() or xas_tag_for_each() instead? > > I hadn't thought of that interpretation. Yes, that makes sense. > Should we also rename xas_find_tag -> xas_find_tagged and xas_next_tag > -> xas_next_tagged? Yup. The family of functions that work with one tag should be renamed. I am fine with the names suggested. -- Goldwyn