linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/22] gpiolib: cdev: rename priv to gcdev

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: <CAMpxmJVsPjOhHymkd=8OsNJZDZUXpU83=m1M4+winaUE0RO2sg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:20:49 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
To:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-gpio <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/22] gpiolib: cdev: rename priv to gcdev

śr., 24 cze 2020 o 16:19 Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> napisał(a):
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:04:09PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > wt., 23 cze 2020 o 06:02 Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> napisał(a):
> > >
> > > Rename priv to gcdev to improve readability.
> > >
> > > The name "priv" indicates that the object is pointed to by
> > > file->private_data, not what the object is actually is.
> > > It is always used to point to a struct gpio_chardev_data so renaming
> > > it to gcdev seemed as good as anything, and certainly clearer than "priv".
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>
> > >
> >
> > Ugh now it's gcdev and gdev everywhere and it doesn't really make it
> > more readable. Maybe chardev_data or cdev_data?
> >
>
> Agreed, it isn't ideal visually, but is at least more unique than priv.
> Linus was going for short names recently (e.g. gc for gpiochip), so I was
> going for something short.
>
> And I try avoid names ending in _data or _state or similar where they
> don't really add anything.
>
> Would chardev or gchardev work for you?
>

Yes, chardev is fine. Even cdev is fine for me: gdev vs gcdev is
confusing but gdev vs cdev looks better IMO.

Bart