Re: [PATCH net-next v11 03/23] ovpn: add basic netlink support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 15.11.2024 12:19, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
On 09/11/2024 00:31, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
On 29.10.2024 12:47, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
+/**
+ * struct ovpn_struct - per ovpn interface state
+ * @dev: the actual netdev representing the tunnel
+ * @dev_tracker: reference tracker for associated dev
+ */
+struct ovpn_struct {

There is no standard convention how to entitle such structures, so the question is basically of out-of-curiosity class. For me, having a sturcuture with name 'struct' is like having no name. Did you consider to use such names as ovpn_dev or ovpn_iface? Meaning, using a name that gives a clue regarding the scope of the content.

Yes, I wanted to switch to ovpn_priv, but  did not care much for the time being :)

I can still do it now in v12.

This topic caused me the biggest doubts. I don't want to ask to rename everything on the final lap. Just want to share an outside perspective on the structure name. And let you decide is it worth or not.

And if you ask me, ovpn_priv does not give a clue either. The module is too complex for a vague structure name, even after your great work on clearing its design.

--
Sergey




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux