Re: [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: extended inode refs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 06 Jul 2012 16:56:40 +0200, Jan Schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 23:46 (+0200), Mark Fasheh wrote:
>> +int find_name_in_ext_backref(struct btrfs_path *path, const char *name,
>> +			     int name_len,
>> +			     struct btrfs_inode_extref **extref_ret)
> 
> Exported functions should be prefixed "btrfs_". What about btrfs_find_extref_name?

>> +
>> +static struct btrfs_inode_ref *
>>  btrfs_lookup_inode_ref(struct btrfs_trans_handle *trans,
> 
> static functions should not be prefixed "btrfs_".

Prefixing _all_ functions with the module name has some advantages:
- uniqueness for ctags(1)
- unique names in stack traces that allow to identify the module and to
find the source code

IMO Mark should not change it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux