On Tuesday 28 July 2009, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 05:01:42PM +0200, Nicolas Palix wrote: > > Ok. So, I guess the pattern for the other typedef is to strip the _OBJECT > > suffix when present, and always add the prefix hv_, right ? > > The 'pattern' is to look at what the code is doing and choose a sensible > name. I took a closer look at how this is used and noticed that there is both the DEVICE_OBJECT typedef and struct device_context. While I don't understand the reason for the split, my feeling is that the contents of DEVICE_OBJECT should really be moved into device_context and that one be renamed to hv_device. Arnd <>< -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
