From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 06:11:00 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Jeff Liu Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] list: introduce list_last_entry_or_null() Message-ID: <20131115141100.GA17659@infradead.org> References: <5285A33C.4040808@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5285A33C.4040808@oracle.com> Cc: jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, jiri@resnulli.us, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "xfs@oss.sgi.com" , cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, oleg@redhat.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:29:48PM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > Hi Folks, > > This patch is trying to introduce a new list helper to retrieve the > last entry or return NULL if the list is empty corresponding to it, > which is inspired by Jiri Pirko's list_first_entry_or_null(). How did we end up with the stupid _or_null prefix there? I think the functionality is useful, but the naming is way to verbose, especially given that a list_first_entry or list_last_entry that optimizes away that one check doesn't seem useful. Instead of encoding detailed semantics in the name a good kerneldoc comment is way better.