Re: [PATCH for-next v5 08/10] RDMA/rxe: Implement invalidate MW operations

Pearson, Robert B
2021-04-29T16:03:09Z

On 4/29/2021 1:12 AM, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:32 AM Pearson, Robert B
> <rpearsonhpe@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/28/2021 10:20 PM, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:07 AM Pearson, Robert B
>>> <rpearsonhpe@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/28/2021 7:54 PM, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
>>>>> Adding a prefix makes debug easy. This can help filter the functions.
>>>>> And a prefix can help us to verify the location of the function.
>>>>>
>>>>> Zhu Yanjun
>>>> For comparison here are all the subroutine names from a well known
>>>> driver file. As you can see, 100% of the non static subroutines *do*
>>>> have mlx5 in their name but the majority of the static ones *do not*,
>>>> and these are by definition not shared anywhere else but this file. This
>>>> is representative of the typical style in linux-rdma.
>>> With perf or ftrace debug tools, a lot of functions will pop out.
>>> A prefix can help the developer to locate the functions source code easily.
>>> And a prefix can help the developer filter the functions conveniently.
>>>
>>> This is why I recommend a prefix.
>>>
>>> Zhu Yanjun
>> Yes, I can tell. We're still debating this. Obviously the developers of
>> mr.c don't entirely agree and I don't either. There are places where it
>> makes sense but the code is ugly IMHO. I think you should let developers
> A prefix can make code easy to debug, then easy to maintain. This is
> not ugly code.^o^
> On the contrary, it is beautiful code. ^o^
>
>> write in the style they are most effective with, especially in the
>> context of a local static subroutine which have a very narrow scope.
> Even though the local static functions still possibly appear in kernel
> debug tools,
> it is necessary to add a prefix to make it easy to locate and filter.
> This can make maintenance
> easy.
>
> Zhu Yanjun
>
>> Bob

OK, I'll try.

Bob