On Wed, Jan 07 2009, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> Jens Axboe wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 05 2009, Kay Sievers wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 19:54, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jan 05 2009, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>>> +static struct queue_sysfs_entry queue_nonrot_entry = {
> >>>> + .attr = {.name = "nonrot", .mode = S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR },
> >>>> + .show = queue_nonrot_show,
> >>>> + .store = queue_nonrot_store,
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>> Lets please use a better name for export reasons, non-rotational is a
> >>> lot better. Nobody will know what nonrot means :-)
> >> What's that negation good for? Can't we just have "rotational", like
> >> we have "removable" and not "non-removable"? :)
> >
> > Non-rotational is the term typically used, since rotational is the norm
> > (still). So I think the negation actually makes sense in this case :-)
>
> You used the word "still" yourself. I mean, in 5 years SSD will be more
> common than rotational media, and "the norm" will be !rotational..
> So let's name them correctly and uniformly from the beginning.. ;)
Not sure I agree with your SSD adoption rate, but that's beside the
point :-)
But I'm inclined to agree with you and Kay after all, lets just call it
'rotational'. I think alternatives like 'cheapseek' are truly horrible,
nobody will know what that means - how cheap is cheap?
I'll fixup the patch.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
