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: <76cd3354-c808-0561-5b07-179161c06aec@bytedance.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Jul 2023 21:32:43 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: Maple Tree Work
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
        maple-tree@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@bytedance.com>
References: <20230707163815.ns4kdz7iut5octjv@revolver>
 <0152143a-b105-a413-ddf2-47f688633d97@bytedance.com>
 <ZLFGMGtk2WMbGhuf@casper.infradead.org>
From:   Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@bytedance.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZLFGMGtk2WMbGhuf@casper.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


在 2023/7/14 20:57, Matthew Wilcox 写道:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 05:58:13PM +0800, Peng Zhang wrote:
>> I have a question I want to discuss here. I noticed that the interface
>> of maple tree has three different prefixes, namely mtree_*, mt_*, mas_*.
>> I am curious why the interfaces prefixed with mtree_* and mt_* cannot be
>> unified? I think they can be changed to mtree_* to avoid two different
>> prefixes.
> 
> I haven't worried about this too much.  The long-term goal is to use
> the maple tree data structure to replace the radix tree data structure
> underlying the xarray and use the xarray API to access the maple tree.
> The xarray API will need some enhancements to make this work, but churning
> the maple tree API doesn't seem like a good use of effort.
> 
If there are two prefixes, mt_ and mtree_, I will be confused which
prefix to use when adding a new API. Users will also be confused when
they see the two prefixes mt_ and mtree_. However, renaming the API
is not a good thing either.