On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 10:14 PM Alex Elder <elder@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > I personally think the typedef here is the appropriate. But > it's really up to Ilya whether he likes this approach. Get > his input before you do more. right, understood. > There's a basic question about whether this is a useful > abstraction. It's used for "lock cookies" but do they > serve a broader purpose? > > The other part of my suggestion was to define functions that > provide an API. For example: > > static inline rbd_cookie_t rbd_cookie_set(rbd_cookie_t cookie, u64 id); > static inline u64 rbd_cookie_get(rbd_cookie_t cookie); I see, I will try implementing such functions. Because of using typedef I made minimal code changes. Thanks for the detailed input > Anyway, before I say any more let's see if Ilya even wants > to go in this direction. Your original proposal was OK, I > just thought specifying the length might be safer. Alright, I'll wait for feedback before making any changes. Thanks for taking time to review the patch -- With Gratitude Siddarth Gundu
