Re: [BK-PATCH 1/3] Introduce fs/inode.c::ilookup().

[Anton Altaparmakov]

At 17:25 08/09/02, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>On Saturday 07 September 2002 16:27, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > Linus,
> >
> > This is the first of three patches implementing ilookup(), a function
> > to search the inode cache for an inode and if not found just return NULL.
> >
> > All response about ilookup() / ilookup5() was positive and several
> > file systems would like to have such a function available.
>
>Well, one person thought it should be called ifind.

Yes, you did. But that is too confusing with find_inode and friends IMHO 
and lookups are often termed _lookup and not _find, e.g. 
radix_tree_lookup(), simple_lookup(), d_lookup(), path_lookup(), 
cached_lookup()...

Whereas there is not a single function in fs/ or mm/ ending in _find... 
They are all called find_blah and find_inode already exists... Having both 
find_inode and inode_find aka ifind seems weird, at least to me...

There was another suggestion on #kernel and that was to do:

s/ilookup/ilookup_fast/
s/ilookup5/ilookup/

But if we do that we might as well carry on and also do:

s/iget_locked/iget_locked_fast/
s/iget5_locked/iget_locked/

And another one was:

s/ilookup5/ilookup_hash/

and by extension / for consistency one could add:

s/iget5_locked/iget_hash_locked/
s/find_inode/find_inode_hash/
s/find_inode_fast/find_inode/
s/get_new_inode_fast/get_new_inode/
s/get_new_inode/get_new_inode_hash/

How about those? I still like ilookup at the beginning, or inode_lookup...

Best regards,

         Anton