From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCB27F5E for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 08:59:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC02DAC001 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 06:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id y1uiqYvhU5Sq4GZd (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 06:59:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 06:59:16 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/27] xfs: consolidate xfs_vnodeops.c into xfs_inode_ops.c Message-ID: <20130612135916.GA28988@infradead.org> References: <1371032567-21772-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1371032567-21772-20-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1371032567-21772-20-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com I can't say I really like the _ops naming, but so far I can't really can't come up with a much better name. I also think that most of xfs_vnodeops.c really should go into xfs_iops.c as it's fairly Linux specific and should just be merged with the actual entry points. Also once the big code move around starts xfs_rename.c really should die and rename should be treated the same as the other namespace operations. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs