From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 08/13] net: sched: rename tcf_block_get{_ext}()
 and tcf_block_put{_ext}()
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 17:24:05 +0200
Message-ID: <20180914152405.GO25110@nanopsycho>
References: <1536220742-25650-1-git-send-email-vladbu@mellanox.com>
 <1536220742-25650-9-git-send-email-vladbu@mellanox.com>
 <CAM_iQpVMU7nPgkw+N_V6ukrH5rx-37+nd+++wj47JRA33RqMUQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <vbfin3bm8ch.fsf@reg-r-vrt-018-180.mtr.labs.mlnx>
 <CAM_iQpV5b4asaUOR1Ly7s_y7x1M-Y7q3Z2DDe6y_r1eKqx8ZDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <vbfo9d0nz3j.fsf@reg-r-vrt-018-180.mtr.labs.mlnx>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
        Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
        lucien xin <lucien.xin@gmail.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
        Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>
To: Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:39030 "EHLO
        mail-wm1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1726902AbeINUnS (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 14 Sep 2018 16:43:18 -0400
Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id q8-v6so2368730wmq.4
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <vbfo9d0nz3j.fsf@reg-r-vrt-018-180.mtr.labs.mlnx>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:38:08PM CEST, vladbu@mellanox.com wrote:
>
>On Thu 13 Sep 2018 at 17:21, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 1:24 AM Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri 07 Sep 2018 at 20:09, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 12:59 AM Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Functions tcf_block_get{_ext}() and tcf_block_put{_ext}() actually
>>> >> attach/detach block to specific Qdisc besides just taking/putting
>>> >> reference. Rename them according to their purpose.
>>> >
>>> > Where exactly does it attach to?
>>> >
>>> > Each qdisc provides a pointer to a pointer of a block, like
>>> > &cl->block. It is where the result is saved to. It takes a parameter
>>> > of Qdisc* merely for read-only purpose.
>>>
>>> tcf_block_attach_ext() passes qdisc parameter to tcf_block_owner_add()
>>> which saves qdisc to new tcf_block_owner_item and adds the item to
>>> block's owner list. I proposed several naming options for these
>>> functions to Jiri on internal review and he suggested "attach" as better
>>> option.
>>
>> But that is merely item->q = q, this is why I said it is read-only,
>> hard to claim this is attaching.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > So, renaming it to *attach() is even confusing, at least not
>>> > any better. Please find other names or leave them as they are.
>>>
>>> What would you recommend?
>>
>> I don't know, perhaps "acquire"?
>>
>> Or, leaving tcf_block_get() as it is but rename your refcnt
>> increment function to be something like tcf_block_refcnt_get()?
>
>Cong, I'm okay with both options.
>
>Jiri, which naming would you prefer?

Maybe tcf_block_refcnt_get() is better.