On Tue, 2025-08-12 at 01:32 +0000, Huang, Kai wrote: > > sc_retry() is the only one with a hint of what is different about it, but it > > randomly uses sc abbreviation instead of seamcall. That is an existing > > thing. > > But the additional one should be named with something about the cache part > > that > > it does, like seamcall_dirty_cache() or something. "do_seamcall()" tells the > > reader nothing. > > OK. I'll change do_seamcall() to seamcall_dirty_cache(). > > Is there anything else I can improve? Otherwise I plan to send out v6 > soon. I do think we should look at improving the stack of seamcall helpers. But otherwise, please add: Reviewed-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx> with the name change.
