On Wed 13-12-17 04:25:33, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:25:48AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > I am afraid we can bikeshed this to death and there will still be > > somebody finding yet another better name. Therefore I've decided to > > stick with my original MAP_FIXED_SAFE. Why? Well, because it keeps the > > MAP_FIXED prefix which should be recognized by developers and _SAFE > > suffix should also be clear that all dangerous side effects of the old > > MAP_FIXED are gone. > > I liked basically every other name suggested more than MAP_FIXED_SAFE. > "Safe against what?" was an important question. > > MAP_AT_ADDR was the best suggestion I saw that wasn't one of mine. Of > my suggestions, I liked MAP_STATIC the best. The question is whether you care enough to pursue this further yourself. Because as I've said I do not want to spend another round discussing the name. The flag is documented and I believe that the name has some merit. Disagreeing on naming is the easiest pitfall to block otherwise useful functionality from being merged. And I am pretty sure there will be always somebody objecting... -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
