From: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@hp.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: mjg@redhat.com, mikew@google.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
keescook@chromium.org, gong.chen@linux.intel.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com,
maxin.john@gmail.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net,
matt.fleming@intel.com, olof@lixom.net, dhowells@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Shorten constant names for EFI variable attributes
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:46:23 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5009DFBF.7060009@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5009DD10.7010205@zytor.com>
On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 07/20/2012 03:30 PM, Khalid Aziz wrote:
>>
>> This patch is based upon earlier discussion at
>> <https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/13/320>.
>>
>> You are right that EFI specification uses exactly these long names for
>> the constants, but does that mean kernel must also use the exact same
>> long constant names? I can see doing that for the sake of consistency.
>> At the same time, can we make the kernel code more readable and retain
>> compatibility with existing API by using aliases? I slightly prefer
>> making kernel code more readable, but I could go either way.
>>
>
> I think it makes the kernel code less readable, because now you not
> only need to understand the kernel code and the EFI spec, but also how
> the two maps onto each other. The fact that you then have to introduce
> aliases indicates to me that you're doing something actively broken.
>
> -hpa
>
As I think more about it, existence of aliases could also potentially
create confusion where someone adding new code to kernel chooses to use
the long name instead. Maybe unless we can make a clean break from long
names, it is not worth doing this and that is going to be problematic
because of the existing usage in userspace programs.
Matthew, do you have a different point of view?
--
Khalid
khalid.aziz@hp.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-20 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-20 22:08 [PATCH] Shorten constant names for EFI variable attributes Khalid Aziz
2012-07-20 22:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-07-20 22:30 ` Khalid Aziz
2012-07-20 22:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-07-20 22:46 ` Khalid Aziz [this message]
2012-07-23 13:26 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-07-26 17:28 ` Khalid Aziz
2012-07-26 17:33 ` Matthew Garrett
2012-09-25 15:41 ` [PATCH -next v2] " Khalid Aziz
2012-09-25 21:55 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-25 23:06 ` Khalid Aziz
2012-09-25 23:12 ` Matthew Garrett
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5009DFBF.7060009@hp.com \
--to=khalid.aziz@hp.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=gong.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=maxin.john@gmail.com \
--cc=mikew@google.com \
--cc=mjg@redhat.com \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox