On 04/21/2014 08:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On 04/21/2014 09:45 AM, Jeff Layton wrote: >> On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 12:10:04 -0400 >> Rich Felker <dalias@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> I'm well aware of that. The problem is that the proposed API is using >>> the two-letter abbreviation FD, which ALWAYS means file descriptor and >>> NEVER means file description (in existing usage) to mean file >>> description. That's what's wrong. >>> >> >> Fair enough. Assuming we kept "file-description locks" as a name, what >> would you propose as new macro names? > > F_OFD_...? F_OPENFILE_...? > > If you said "file description" to me, I'd assume you made a typo. If, > on the other hand, you said "open file" or "open file description" or, > ugh, "struct file", I think I'd understand. "Open file description locks" is a mouthful, but, personally, I could live with it. "struct file" is not a term that belongs in user-space. "open file" is too ambiguous, IMO. -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
