Re: [RFC] next cycle fun: ->release() API change

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Because renaming really doesn't buy us anything but pain.
>
> Umm...  I'd rather go the whole way and get rid of inode argument as well,
> while we are at it.  It's completely redundant and it's unused in very large
> majority of the instances.

So? What's the advantage of removing it?

Also, "->close()" would be *exactly* the wrong name to call this,
since it would be absolutely and utterly misleading. "->release()" is
_not_ about close, and in fact the whole return code is partially due
to people thinking it is. It's "->flush()" that gets called at close
time.

               Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/