On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 09:38:12AM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > On 9.05.2018 16:54, David Sterba wrote: > > The FS_*_FL flags cannot be easily identified by a variable name prefix > > but we still need to recognize them so the 'fsflags' should be closer to > > the naming scheme but again the 'fs' part sounds like it's a filesystem > > flag. I don't have a better idea for now. > > Why not using iflags, my reasoning is that the official documentation of > those flags: http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/ioctl_iflags.2.html > refers to them as "inode flags" hence iflags or the slightly longer > inode_flags? The first patch tries to capture the inode flags name for the btrfs inode ... "The btrfs inode flag flavour is now simply called 'inode flags'" The manual page talks only about one ioctl and namespace, but in the code we have to deal with several. I'm not happy about the naming, but at least it's obvious which namespace is used. -- 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
