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;
Message-ID: <cf24d6b5496598e7717428c6bdcb2366a7d49529.camel@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] Rename "cifs" module to "smbfs"
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
To:     Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@suse.de>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
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,
        samba-technical@lists.samba.org, pshilovsky@samba.org
Date:   Thu, 04 Aug 2022 15:03:23 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20220803015655.7u5b6i4eo5sfnryb@cyberdelia>
References: <20220801190933.27197-1-ematsumiya@suse.de>
         <c05f4fc668fa97e737758ab03030d7170c0edbd9.camel@kernel.org>
         <20220802193620.dyvt5qiszm2pobsr@cyberdelia>
         <6f3479265b446d180d71832fd0c12650b908ebe2.camel@kernel.org>
         <1c2e8880-3efe-b55d-ee50-87d57efc3130@talpey.com>
         <20220803015655.7u5b6i4eo5sfnryb@cyberdelia>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.3 (3.44.3-1.fc36) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2022-08-02 at 22:56 -0300, Enzo Matsumiya wrote:
> On 08/02, Tom Talpey wrote:
> > The initial goal is to modularize the SMB1 code, so it can be completel=
y
> > removed from a running system. The extensive refactoring logically lead=
s
> > to this directory renaming, but renaming is basically a side effect.
> >=20

This is a great technical goal. Splitting up cifs.ko into smaller
modules would be great, in addition to being able to turn off smb1
support.

> > Stamping out the four-letter word C-I-F-S is a secondary goal. At this
> > point, the industry has stopped using it. You make a good point that
> > it's still visible outside the kernel source though.
> >=20
> > It makes good sense to do the refactoring in place, at first. Splitting
> > the {smb1,cifs}*.[ch] files will be more complex, but maybe easier to
> > review and merge, without folding in a new directory tree and git rm/mv=
.
> > Either way, there will be at least two modules, maybe three if we split
> > out generic subroutines.
> >=20
> > Enzo, you're up to your elbows in this code now, is it too ugly without
> > the new directories?
>=20
> Having things in separate directories and code appropriately distributed
> in coherently named headers/sources certainly makes things easier to
> work with.
>=20
> Of course this patch is not important, by far, but from what I
> gathered, it was some people's wish to move away from "cifs" name.
>=20
> Answering your question (IIUC), Tom, I'm ok with postponing this change.
>=20
>=20

Cool. I'm not even really opposed to moving the directory to a new one,
but I think a change of that magnitude ought to have some clear
technical benefit. Maybe it'll look more palatable once the breakup into
multiple modules is in place.

--=20
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>