linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to file-description locks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <535566B6.6070700@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Apr 2014 20:43:02 +0200
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
CC:	mtk.manpages@...il.com, libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
	Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>,
	samba-technical@...ts.samba.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Stefan (metze) Metzmacher" <metze@...ba.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ganesha NFS List <nfs-ganesha-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to file-description
 locks

On 04/21/2014 08:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On 04/21/2014 09:45 AM, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 12:10:04 -0400
>> Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
>>> I'm well aware of that. The problem is that the proposed API is using
>>> the two-letter abbreviation FD, which ALWAYS means file descriptor and
>>> NEVER means file description (in existing usage) to mean file
>>> description. That's what's wrong.
>>>
>>
>> Fair enough. Assuming we kept "file-description locks" as a name, what
>> would you propose as new macro names?
> 
> F_OFD_...?  F_OPENFILE_...?
> 
> If you said "file description" to me, I'd assume you made a typo.  If,
> on the other hand, you said "open file" or "open file description" or,
> ugh, "struct file", I think I'd understand.

"Open file description locks" is a mouthful, but, personally, I could
live with it. "struct file" is not a term that belongs in user-space.
"open file" is too ambiguous, IMO.


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/