On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 1:03 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: <snip> > >usb_function_driver. > > > >I would call the structure in question "usb_function_module". > >Or even better: "usb_function_pool" - you get usb_functions from it. > >Please see inline for what it looks like. > > Not sure I can agree here. It is not what we use "usb_function" for. > That thing that comes out of "try_get_usb_function_instance", the > usb_function_instance, is an instance which matches what I read here [0]. > Yes, it is a specific USB function, with the same "configuration". So it looks like the "usb_function_instance" is in fact a usb function's _configuration_ instance? > "usb_function" is something we use in "usb_configuration" and those two > are not the same. Yet, the first thing that comes to my mind after I think of a "usb function instance" (no underscores here intentionally) is an instance of a struct usb_function. This is confusing me. It took me a long while until I understood what is going on here. Would you mind finding a better name for it? In order not to confuse those two I just picked > something else. try_get_usb_function_instance() returnes severel kinds of > objects so it does not match "pool" in OO language. If you look at > skb_pool you expect a skb and always a skb and each skb has the same > capabilities. This is simple not true here. > I think in OO language try_get_usb_function_instance() would match a > "fabric" and usb_get_function() would match the "pool". > I meant to call the _struct_ usb_function_instance a usb_function_pool. This in fact is consistent with what you say above: in OO language you could call a factory method on behalf of some object (or perhaps, a class). In C we pass this object explicitly as there is no "this" pointer. So to the usb_get_function() factory method is called on behalf of some object which is passed as an argument. And I suggest calling this argument a usb_function_pool: /* pool below is the "this" */ struct usb_function *usb_get_function(struct usb_function_pool *pool); so the "usb_get_function" method is called on behalf of some pool. I am not insisting on "pool". But for the reasons given above I would like the struct usb_function_instance (and its dependent names) to be called differently. AP -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
