From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC407C120 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2023 04:51:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="TVRkEEqk" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54449C433C8; Tue, 19 Dec 2023 04:51:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1702961463; bh=UNdVjtgWJae6bJHcOE0s83UhXKsRV9WG4yIEuhz9S/Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TVRkEEqkAidUmOxsTfi3fYvDpp/Zd2QnXfk6hAGWGlpfIYZybchISUZXn17xclWch ytMUrr/xQqt9WC3J6etbWpNTE0SUokQdC5GPWGcY7tWjfs8amfnW60FLya40YOKnt4 NYQZEKsH1lVliiBK3wRZj/aj3QlSE163IIFoFCD0+0N/oLdOnfmO8xnvahCjDiWP0s H53BgeR9zLPCUeS5PA8JgPNJE+IlTdUDRtOKjJuC79EQJJTPrOT1m9Yd2gO5VaXSGK 6rB7nb/q9pcGB7TXigFFXofXiBoV/FxTYgI9lSJvTcf1DwDLAfr0knMVdu6uhmBWWx c6LH2USSxfySQ== Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 20:51:02 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Chandan Babu R , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/22] xfs: rename xfs_bmap_rtalloc to xfs_rtallocate_extent Message-ID: <20231219045102.GG361584@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20231218045738.711465-1-hch@lst.de> <20231218045738.711465-23-hch@lst.de> <20231218222430.GW361584@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20231219041755.GA30404@lst.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231219041755.GA30404@lst.de> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 05:17:55AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 02:24:30PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > -xfs_bmap_rtalloc( > > > +xfs_rtallocate_extent( > > > struct xfs_bmalloca *ap) > > > > Hmm. I'm still not sure I like the name here -- we're doing an rt > > allocation for a bmap allocation args structure. > > > > xfs_rtalloc_bmap? > > > > (Or just drop this one, I've lost my will to fight over naming.) > > I have to say I don't really like the bmap in the low-level allocator > to start with, but maybe for that to happen we need to stop passing > the xfs_bmalloca structure. > > So droppign it and living the with the pre-existing name for now until > we can clean up the whole are further seems like a good plan to me. Ok by me! --D