Re: [PATCH 01/32] block: Provide blkdev_get_handle_* functions

[Haris Iqbal <haris.iqbal@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 5:38 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 02:21:28PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Create struct bdev_handle that contains all parameters that need to be
> > passed to blkdev_put() and provide blkdev_get_handle_* functions that
> > return this structure instead of plain bdev pointer. This will
> > eventually allow us to pass one more argument to blkdev_put() without
> > too much hassle.
>
> Can we use the opportunity to come up with better names?  blkdev_get_*
> was always a rather horrible naming convention for something that
> ends up calling into ->open.
>
> What about:
>
> struct bdev_handle *bdev_open_by_dev(dev_t dev, blk_mode_t mode, void *holder,
>                 const struct blk_holder_ops *hops);
> struct bdev_handle *bdev_open_by_path(dev_t dev, blk_mode_t mode,
>                 void *holder, const struct blk_holder_ops *hops);
> void bdev_release(struct bdev_handle *handle);

+1 to this.
Also, if we are removing "handle" from the function, should the name
of the structure it returns also change? Would something like bdev_ctx
be better?

(Apologies for the previous non-plaintext email)

>
> ?