Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 20:22:44 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@suse.de>
Cc:     linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, smfrench@gmail.com, pc@cjr.nz,
        ronniesahlberg@gmail.com, nspmangalore@gmail.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        tom@talpey.com, samba-technical@lists.samba.org,
        pshilovsky@samba.org, jlayton@kernel.org, rpenny@samba.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] Rename "cifs" module to "smbfs"
Message-ID: <Yul5hBFmwoOQ0cxG@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20220802190048.19881-1-ematsumiya@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220802190048.19881-1-ematsumiya@suse.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 04:00:43PM -0300, Enzo Matsumiya wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> As part of the ongoing effort to remove the "cifs" nomenclature from the
> Linux SMB client, I'm proposing the rename of the module to "smbfs".
> 
> As it's widely known, CIFS is associated to SMB1.0, which, in turn, is
> associated with the security issues it presented in the past. Using
> "SMBFS" makes clear what's the protocol in use for outsiders, but also
> unties it from any particular protocol version. It also fits in the
> already existing "fs/smbfs_common" and "fs/ksmbd" naming scheme.
> 
> This short patch series only changes directory names and includes/ifdefs in
> headers and source code, and updates docs to reflect the rename. Other
> than that, no source code/functionality is modified (WIP though).

Why did you not reply to Jeff Layton's concern before posting a v2?