Re: [PATCH 13/15] ide: add ata_set{_max}_pio()

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> This has been changing recently since "ide_" prefix seems to have
> negative emotional connotations. :-)
> 
> New patches for drivers/ide should use exclusively the "ata_" prefix.

So this choice to be inconsistent was made based entirely on fashion?

This is the same as using a different coding style in one area of the 
IDE driver, when the rest of the IDE driver uses another coding style.

It violates the Principle of Least Surprise.

I cannot see any harm in continuing to use the prefix the IDE driver has 
been using for over a decade, while I can see how inconsistency


>> particularly when libata uses the "ata_" prefix almost exclusively.
> 
> I don't see *any* problem with this since libata exists in the separate
> directory and the amount of code shared between libata and drivers/ide
> equals *zero* (not counting <linux/ata.h> containing defines etc).

There are many opportunities for confusion:  global grep.  oops traces. 
  General reviewer expectations ("oooh, I grepped for ide_xxx because 
thats what all the functions use, except for this ONE function that's 
different")

You are living in a global namespace.  Directories are irrelevant.

	Jeff