Re: [PATCH net-next] net: rename reference+tracking helpers

[Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>]

Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 04:58:27PM CEST, kuba@kernel.org wrote:
>On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 10:27:15 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 06:39:55AM CEST, kuba@kernel.org wrote:
>> >Netdev reference helpers have a dev_ prefix for historic
>> >reasons. Renaming the old helpers would be too much churn  
>> 
>> Hmm, I think it would be great to eventually rename the rest too in
>> order to maintain unique prefix for netdev things. Why do you think the
>> "churn" would be an issue?
>
>Felt like we're better of moving everyone to the new tracking helpers
>than doing just a pure rename. But I'm not opposed to a pure rename.
>
>> >diff --git a/drivers/net/macsec.c b/drivers/net/macsec.c
>> >index 817577e713d7..815738c0e067 100644
>> >--- a/drivers/net/macsec.c
>> >+++ b/drivers/net/macsec.c
>> >@@ -3462,7 +3462,7 @@ static int macsec_dev_init(struct net_device *dev)
>> > 		memcpy(dev->broadcast, real_dev->broadcast, dev->addr_len);
>> > 
>> > 	/* Get macsec's reference to real_dev */
>> >-	dev_hold_track(real_dev, &macsec->dev_tracker, GFP_KERNEL);
>> >+	netdev_hold(real_dev, &macsec->dev_tracker, GFP_KERNEL);  
>> 
>> So we later decide to rename dev_hold() to obey the netdev_*() naming
>> scheme, we would have collision.
>
>dev_hold() should not be used in new code, we should use tracking
>everywhere. Given that we can name the old helpers __netdev_hold().
>
>> Also, seems to me odd to have:
>> OLDPREFIX_x()
>> and
>> NEWPREFIX_x()
>> to be different functions.
>> 
>> For the sake of not making naming mess, could we rather have:
>> netdev_hold_track()
>> or
>> netdev_hold_tr() if the prior is too long
>> ?
>
>See above, one day non-track version should be removed.
>IMO to encourage use of the track-capable API we could keep their names
>short and call the legacy functions __netdev_hold() as I mentioned or
>maybe netdev_hold_notrack().

Okay, that makes sense.