On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 07:38:57PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 08.09.25 17:31, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 05:19:18PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > On 08.09.25 13:10, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > > > Now we have the f_op->mmap_prepare() hook, having a static function > > > > called > > > > __mmap_prepare() that has nothing to do with it is confusing, so rename > > > > the > > > > function. > > > > > > > > Additionally rename __mmap_complete() to __mmap_epilogue(), as we > > > > intend to > > > > provide a f_op->mmap_complete() callback. > > > > > > Isn't prologue the opposite of epilogue? :) > > > > :) well indeed, the prologue comes _first_ and epilogue comes _last_. So we > > rename the bit that comes first > > > > > > > > I guess I would just have done a > > > > > > __mmap_prepare -> __mmap_setup() > > > > Sure will rename to __mmap_setup(). > > > > > > > > and left the __mmap_complete() as is. > > > > But we are adding a 'mmap_complete' hook :)' > > > > I can think of another sensible name here then if I'm being too abstract > > here... > > > > __mmap_finish() or something. > > LGTM. I guess it would all be clearer if we could just describe less > abstract what is happening. But that would likely imply a bigger rework. So > setup/finish sounds good.
Ack will fix on respin! > > -- > Cheers > > David / dhildenb > Cheers, Lorenzo
