From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: About the naming of ata_drive_probe_reset() Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 12:24:05 +0900 Message-ID: <446BE8D5.5010404@gmail.com> References: <446BE350.5000504@tw.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]:53961 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750854AbWERDYO (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 May 2006 23:24:14 -0400 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so387973ugf for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 20:24:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <446BE350.5000504@tw.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: albertl@mail.com Cc: Jeff Garzik , Linux IDE Albert Lee wrote: > Hi Tejun, > > The ata_drive_probe_reset() is not drive-specific. > Actually what got reset is the port. (I guess the "drive" doesn't mean device here.) > Maybe something like ata_port_probe_reset() or ata_do_probe_reset() is less ambiguous? The 'drive' is actually a verb. The function drives (verb) probe_reset (object) using the given methods. Maybe a bad naming. Anyways, the whole probe_reset stuff is gonna be removed with the hotplug patchset, so I think it can be left as it is until then. However, I also used the ata_drive_*() naming convention else where, like ata_bmdma_drive_eh(). We may need to rename them. I still want to signify that the function isn't actually a callback but something that can be used to drive a callback. I like 'drive' but as you have pointed out it can be confused with hard 'drive'. Maybe ata_steer_*()? Any other ideas? -- tejun