From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:13:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.168.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m6P4DHom009802 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:13:18 -0700 Received: from verein.lst.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 3FDFF32C681 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.210]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id hCeykChuwWXJ0VCy for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 06:14:18 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/15] refactor xfs_btree_readahead Message-ID: <20080725041418.GB20636@lst.de> References: <20080723200859.GH7401@lst.de> <20080724233655.GH15438@disturbed> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080724233655.GH15438@disturbed> Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 09:36:55AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:08:59PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > From: Dave Chinner > > Can i review my own code? ;) Sure.. > > +STATIC int > > +xfs_btree_reada_corel( > > I've been wondering if this is the best naming convention - > appending a single s or l to indicate short or long btree ops. > Perhaps this would be better as xfs_btree_readahead_short() and > xfs_btree_readahead_long(), esp. as we dropped the 'core' from > the caller to make it xfs_btree_readahead(). > > Otherwise it looks good. I'll see if I can find a saner name.