linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] gpiolib: add gpiods_set_array_value

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <CAMRc=McEdcDs01BAKN5vg9POg_xxJBY1k8bfgiDN60C1-e_jow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 17:14:07 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, 
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, 
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, 
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, 
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, 
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, 
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>, 
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] gpiolib: add gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep

On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 5:09 PM David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/1/25 4:36 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> >
> > This looks good to me except for one thing: the function prefix. I would
> > really appreciate it if we could stay within the existing gpiod_ namespace and
> > not add a new one in the form of gpiods_.
> >
> > Maybe: gpiod_multiple_set_ or gpiod_collected_set...?
> >
> > Bartosz
>
> I was waiting for someone to complain about the naming. ;-)
>
> I was going for as short as possible, but OK, the most obvious prefix to me
> would be `gpio_descs_...` (to match the first parameter). Any objections to
> that?
>

Yes, objection! As far as any exported interfaces go: in my book
"gpio_" is the prefix for legacy symbols we want to go away and
"gpiod_" is the prefix for current, descriptor-based API. Anything
else is a no-go. I prefer a longer name that starts with gpiod_ over
anything that's shorter but doesn't.

Bartosz