[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1500398136.2042.17.camel@hpe.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 17:24:50 +0000
From: "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To: "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com"
<srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI / blacklist: add acpi_match_oemlist() interface
On Tue, 2017-07-18 at 18:43 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 03:48:54PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> > This patch defines 'struct acpi_oemlist' in "include/linux/acpi.h"
> > as a
>
> I see that.
>
> > common structure, and replaces this specific 'struct
> > acpi_blacklist'.
>
> And what makes acpi_oemlist "common" and acpi_blacklist "specific"?
>
> So let me save you some time - "oemlist" is more specific than
> "blacklist" and I can imagine a blacklist item not always being
> oem-specific.
>
> What I'm hinting at is, don't change that name. acpi_blacklist is
> just fine.
Well, a list does not need to be a black-list. It can be a white-list
or anything that matters. The caller defines the usage of a list. So,
I tried to avoid putting any usage to the structure name.
> > Agreed. Will change to a shorter name like below.
> >
> > enum acpi_oemlist_pred predicate;
>
> enum acpi_predicate pred;
>
> is even better.
Sounds good.
Thanks,
-Toshi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists