Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-qc0-f178.google.com ([209.85.216.178]:62345 "EHLO mail-qc0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752573AbaHSTqY (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Aug 2014 15:46:24 -0400 Received: by mail-qc0-f178.google.com with SMTP id x3so6762399qcv.37 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 12:46:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Layton Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 15:46:20 -0400 To: Kinglong Mee Cc: Jeff Layton , "J. Bruce Fields" , Linux NFS Mailing List , Trond Myklebust , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6 v4] locks: Rename __locks_copy_lock() to locks_copy_conflock() Message-ID: <20140819154620.5a8720e5@tlielax.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <53F36B6F.8000601@gmail.com> References: <53BAAAC5.9000106@gmail.com> <53E22EA5.70708@gmail.com> <20140809065112.700e0ecc@tlielax.poochiereds.net> <53E791F1.40802@gmail.com> <53ED5093.6000308@gmail.com> <53F36B6F.8000601@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 23:21:19 +0800 Kinglong Mee wrote: > Jeff advice, " Right now __locks_copy_lock is only used to copy > conflocks. It would be good to rename that to something more > distinct (i.e.locks_copy_conflock), to make it clear that we're > generating a conflock there." > > v4: a new patch only rename > > Signed-off-by: Kinglong Mee > --- > fs/locks.c | 10 +++++----- > include/linux/fs.h | 4 ++-- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/locks.c b/fs/locks.c > index 08342e0..c376561 100644 > --- a/fs/locks.c > +++ b/fs/locks.c > @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ static void locks_copy_private(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) > /* > * Initialize a new lock from an existing file_lock structure. > */ > -void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, const struct file_lock *fl) > +void locks_copy_conflock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) > { > new->fl_owner = fl->fl_owner; > new->fl_pid = fl->fl_pid; > @@ -301,14 +301,14 @@ void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, const struct file_lock *fl) > new->fl_ops = NULL; > new->fl_lmops = NULL; > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__locks_copy_lock); > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(locks_copy_conflock); > > void locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) > { > /* "new" must be a freshly-initialized lock */ > WARN_ON_ONCE(new->fl_ops); > > - __locks_copy_lock(new, fl); > + locks_copy_conflock(new, fl); > new->fl_file = fl->fl_file; > new->fl_ops = fl->fl_ops; > new->fl_lmops = fl->fl_lmops; > @@ -743,7 +743,7 @@ posix_test_lock(struct file *filp, struct file_lock *fl) > break; > } > if (cfl) { > - __locks_copy_lock(fl, cfl); > + locks_copy_conflock(fl, cfl); > if (cfl->fl_nspid) > fl->fl_pid = pid_vnr(cfl->fl_nspid); > } else > @@ -949,7 +949,7 @@ static int __posix_lock_file(struct inode *inode, struct file_lock *request, str > if (!posix_locks_conflict(request, fl)) > continue; > if (conflock) > - __locks_copy_lock(conflock, fl); > + locks_copy_conflock(conflock, fl); > error = -EAGAIN; > if (!(request->fl_flags & FL_SLEEP)) > goto out; > diff --git a/include/linux/fs.h b/include/linux/fs.h > index 6829340..3b07ce2 100644 > --- a/include/linux/fs.h > +++ b/include/linux/fs.h > @@ -968,7 +968,7 @@ void locks_free_lock(struct file_lock *fl); > extern void locks_init_lock(struct file_lock *); > extern struct file_lock * locks_alloc_lock(void); > extern void locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *); > -extern void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *, const struct file_lock *); > +extern void locks_copy_conflock(struct file_lock *, struct file_lock *); > extern void locks_remove_posix(struct file *, fl_owner_t); > extern void locks_remove_file(struct file *); > extern void locks_release_private(struct file_lock *); > @@ -1028,7 +1028,7 @@ static inline void locks_init_lock(struct file_lock *fl) > return; > } > > -static inline void __locks_copy_lock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) > +static inline void locks_copy_conflock(struct file_lock *new, struct file_lock *fl) > { > return; > } Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton