On Mon 15-11-21 10:59:20, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: [...] > Hi Andrew, > I haven't seen any feedback on my patchset for some time now. I think > I addressed all the questions and comments (please correct me if I > missed anything). I believe the strings vs. ids have been mostly hand waved away. The biggest argument for the former was convenience for developers to have something human readable. There was no actual proposal about the naming convention so we are relying on some unwritten rules or knowledge of the code to be debugged to make human readable string human understandable ones. I believe this has never been properly resolved except for - this has been used in Android and working just fine. I am not convinced TBH. So in the end we are adding a user interface that brings a runtime and resource overhead that will be hard to change in the future. Reference counting handles a part of that and that is nice but ids simply do not have any of that. > Can it be accepted as is or is there something I should address > further? Is the above reason to nack it? No, I do not think so. I just do not feel like I want to ack it either. Concerns have been expressed and I have to say that I would like a minimalistic approach much more. Also extending ids into string is always possible. The other way around is not possible. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
