From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-eopbgr690092.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([40.107.69.92]:12640 "EHLO NAM04-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389053AbfBRR5D (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:57:03 -0500 Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2019 12:56:51 -0500 From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/9] block: add nr_mirrors to request_queue Message-ID: <20190218175651.GA5210@mit.edu> References: <20190213095044.29628-1-bob.liu@oracle.com> <20190213095044.29628-2-bob.liu@oracle.com> <20190213160408.GW23000@mit.edu> <56d2dc78-01f8-9991-9199-372fe864d9f0@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56d2dc78-01f8-9991-9199-372fe864d9f0@oracle.com> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Bob Liu Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, martin.petersen@oracle.com, shirley.ma@oracle.com, allison.henderson@oracle.com, david@fromorbit.com, darrick.wong@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org, adilger@dilger.ca On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 01:57:20PM +0800, Bob Liu wrote: > > Now the initial/default value is 1 indicating only one copy of data. > Would nr_copy be more accurate? > Well, it's at least shorter; the problem is that it's not really another "copy" of the data, it's just that it can simply be different (multiple) ways of reconstructing the data. I suppose we could say that it's a virtual copy. In any case, I can't think of a better term, so nr_copy is probably as good as any. Cheers, - Ted