On 05.09.19 15:05, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 09.08.2019 um 18:13 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
>> In order to make filters work in backing chains, the associated
>> functions must be able to deal with them and freeze all filter links, be
>> they COW or R/W filter links.
>>
>> In the process, rename these functions to reflect that they now act on
>> generalized chains of filter nodes instead of backing chains alone.
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea. The functions are still following the
> backing chain. A generic "chain" could mean following the bs->file links
> or any other children, so the new name is confusing because it doesn't
> really tell you any more what the function does. I'd prefer the name to
> stay specific.
They’re following backing chains, among others.

It would make sense to rename s/backing_chain/filter_chain/, that is, in
case you don‘t find lumping COW and R/W filters together under “filter”
too offensive.

(Naming things is hard.  I’m open for suggestions, but I found the
“filter” concept succinct, even if it does not fully align with our
existing parlance.)

Max

>> While at it, add some comments that note which functions require their
>> caller to ensure that a given child link is not frozen, and how the
>> callers do so.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
> 
> Kevin
>