Re: [PATCH 08/13] iomap: move the iomap_sector sector calculation out of iomap_add_to_ioend

Darrick J. Wong
2023-11-29T04:53:58Z

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 02:54:02PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 03:24:49PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > > static bool
> > > -iomap_can_add_to_ioend(struct iomap_writepage_ctx *wpc, loff_t offset,
> > > - sector_t sector)
> > > +iomap_can_add_to_ioend(struct iomap_writepage_ctx *wpc, loff_t offset)

Can you change @offset to @pos while you're changing the function
signature?

> > Not sure which style you would like to keep in fs/iomap/.
> > Should the function name be in the same line as "static bool" or in the next line?
> > For previous function you made the function name definition in the same
> > line. Or is the naming style irrelevant for fs/iomap/?
>
> The XFS style that iomap start out with has the separate line, and I
> actually kinda like it. But I think willy convinced us a while ago to
> move the common line which is the normal kernel style, and most new code
> seems to use this. And yes, I should probably be consistent and I
> should change it here as well.

I prefer xfs style, but I've been told privately to knock it off outside
xfs. So. Fugly kernel style with too much manual whitespace
maintenance it is. :/

--D