On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 11:59 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote: > Dave, taskref sounds a bit too much generic for me... I completely agree. It's a pretty generic name. In the kernel, though it does provide lookups to tasks. I think the in-kernel task vs. process naming means that it is more consistent if we use something with "task" in it. It may be called a "process identifier" in userspace but, in the kernel, it appears to deal squarely with tasks. > But I can't provide some better name :/ > > pid - number > pref (or tref) - process (task) ref, e.g. pid(filp->f_owner.pref) > pref_struct - former pid_struct, e.g. struct pref_struct pref; Not bad. But, it would be nice to get away from pid-like names. Part of the problem with things like 'struct pid_struct' is that the structure name is nice, but people will still do: struct pid_struct pid; And we're back to square one. :( -- Dave _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers