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

["Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>]

Jeff,
On 04/21/2014 06:45 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 12:10:04 -0400
> Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 04:23:54PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
>>> On 04/21/2014 04:02 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 09:45:35AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
[...]
>>>    initial preference, and I also suggested "file-description locks"
>>>    and noted the drawbacks of that term. I think it's insufficient
>>>    to say "stick with the existing poor name"--if you have
>>>    something better, then please propose it. (Note by the way
>>>    that for nearly a decade now, the open(2) man page has followed
>>>    POSIX in using the term "open file description. Full disclosure:
>>>    of course, I'm responsible for that change in the man page.)
>>
>> 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?

I assume you meant, "assume we kept the term 'file-private locks'..."
In that case, at least make the constants something like

F_FP_SETLK
F_FP_SETLKW
F_FP_GETLK

so that they are not confused with the traditional constants.

Cheer,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/