Em Wed, 03 Sep 2014 13:50:05 +0300 Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> escreveu: > On 09/03/2014 01:38 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Em Wed, 03 Sep 2014 05:26:53 +0300 > > Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> escreveu: > > > >> On 09/02/2014 09:51 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >>> Em Fri, 22 Aug 2014 13:58:08 +0300 > >>> Antti Palosaari <crope@xxxxxx> escreveu: > >>> > >>>> I like short names for things which are used everywhere overall the > >>>> driver. Due to that rename device state pointer from 'priv' to 's'. > >>> > >>> Please, don't do that. "s" is generally used on several places for string. > >>> If you want a shorter name, call it "st" for example. > >> > >> huoh :/ > >> st is not even much better. 'dev' seems to be the 'official' term. I > >> will start using it. There is one caveat when 'dev' is used as kernel > >> dev_foo() logging requires pointer to device, which is also called dev. > > > > Yeah, on v4l2, we generally use 'dev' for such struct on several drivers. > > Yet, it looks confusing, especially when some part of the code needs to > > work with the private structure and struct device. > > > > So, we end having things like dev->udev->dev inside them, with looks > > ugly, IMHO. > > I renamed it to dev due to 2 reasons (I did quite a lot of work to find > out which it should be): > 1) it was mostly used term in kernel code base for that structure > holding device instance state > 2) it was used in book Linux Device Drivers, Third Edition Works for me. Regards, Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
