From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77E6AC07E96 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:38:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56189613BF for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 10:38:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238259AbhGOKlJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 06:41:09 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56382 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234408AbhGOKlJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2021 06:41:09 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb2d.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EA5CC061760; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 03:38:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2d.google.com with SMTP id x192so8274073ybe.6; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 03:38:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kf//qSKVm8jwV9su5vj/cyZO+d19fZjtVwbyBoOChKM=; b=OYWGsPvHAU8pBbGk+jWO0R2YomvuxZLDCdqHykFxmr1t1y4aX0JEsbk+TUHCGG/mgG rVj3PhqGDhIN7qr578G1B7V/9HDZVzlFVU+RnSSuQ1a5/YklzWOX3y2eKrxfKdhkdUhd tY9Ss1nDJVEXgf1wWZFeXwdUiGq+HeGJDV4ARqwv3a9mdABfXpbu7Hd/rjGMIg2BRfCI 072uzuott5MJ4gw8WuPwiGxCdzukPjQTYjpgoTiHqLbg8fBi4FS96ypSqNxUHEmjnUh5 ZKb5P+VBMLMBH1Ac1zjwB3s3MfhKX2ezK+cSNCAuWcMCQQv2W8Q02+XF5Qj0/cy4KV5t RbHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kf//qSKVm8jwV9su5vj/cyZO+d19fZjtVwbyBoOChKM=; b=YU4oHGMaPRa4bO6DGpLnYrFcKzKIl29xIZhbvtf4/qpt20v+4tZlLwyiLx/84DGCrd wpLVqwl2tNnpcHA8zys86TIBaAKz4qAf5Tvse/Y/ClkG5Y9rY9weEdMQxOzKhPRwR+4v m5pMeHEO6OTS7JTdO1QX22HiQmt8AtEl//VdgCRX+//z2wwuQryk7drmTuYRqYj1rxIC fQAh+0vhoPWx8J0ya/LYxEzRY6rewnJ0nZZMC3KV4PN5pWpbzpkEgsRVINMDfT18b44U XRXOsEvAInJuKlvSRdqcKu466GuhGYDUoo/c/0DdJJF6Bm5a6cppd8e+8nsEGKWxnRc2 B6Sg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5326TRAKD+5xq7Zr5Vnoa3zKTgRDpT9BY96WI3XUeVgWn62aXJdU yFz9eLWW2JtFFK8/ZJzsau4UdnLTUHET5bWbt1zlur4gDVnOxHLQ X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwstwcwWPneKxFLBp6bB4LiIKgddK8ID+0mAvsmceYMtOn+HANvCM+4V/mlvUMx8R+UaB1ixfBJ5P1fCoHgfY8= X-Received: by 2002:a25:da11:: with SMTP id n17mr4538213ybf.428.1626345494989; Thu, 15 Jul 2021 03:38:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210712123649.1102392-1-dkadashev@gmail.com> <20210712123649.1102392-2-dkadashev@gmail.com> <20210713145341.lngtd5g3p6zf5eoo@wittgenstein> In-Reply-To: From: Dmitry Kadashev Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 17:38:03 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] namei: clean up do_rmdir retry logic To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christian Brauner , Jens Axboe , Alexander Viro , linux-fsdevel , io-uring Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 11:58 PM Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 7:53 AM Christian Brauner > wrote: > > > > Instead of naming all these $something_helper I would follow the > > underscore naming pattern we usually do, i.e. instead of e.g. > > rmdir_helper do __rmdir() or __do_rmdir(). > > That's certainly a pattern we have, but I don't necessarily love it. > > It would be even better if we'd have names that actually explain > what/why the abstraction exists. In this case, it's the "possibly > retry due to ESTALE", but I have no idea how to sanely name that. > Making it "try_rmdir()" or something like that is the best I can come > up with right now. > > On a similar note, the existing "do_rmdir()" and friends aren't > wonderful names either, but we expose that name out so changing it is > probably not worth it. But right now we have "vfs_rmdir()" and > "do_rmdir()", and they are just different levels of the "rmdir stack", > without the name really describing where in the stack they are. > > Naming is hard, and I don't think the double underscores have been > wonderful either. Naming *is* hard, I do not have any good ideas here, so I just went with try_rmdir(). Christian, Linus, let me know if that is not good enough. -- Dmitry Kadashev