From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932935AbaDVO4H (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:56:07 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21540 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932884AbaDVO4C (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:56:02 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:55:20 -0400 From: Jeff Layton To: Boaz Harrosh Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, Ganesha NFS List , libc-alpha , Michael Kerrisk , Christoph Hellwig , "Carlos O'Donell" , Stefan Metzmacher , Andy Lutomirski , Frank Filz , "Theodore Ts'o" Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to "open file description locks" Message-ID: <20140422105520.7b09eda5@tlielax.poochiereds.net> In-Reply-To: <5356808B.3040303@gmail.com> References: <1398169383-10743-1-git-send-email-jlayton@redhat.com> <5356808B.3040303@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:45:31 +0300 Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 04/22/2014 03:23 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: > <> > > > > We're going to have to live with these for a long time, so it's > > important that we be happy with the names before we're stuck with them. > > The consensus on the lists so far is that they should be rechristened as > > "open file description locks". > > > > I completely agree with the rename. (Though could you please post > the rest of the rename patches for review) > > Just a very small nit. My native language is not English but I would > rather you use "file-descriptor" (with an '-' as well) and not > use "description" in the English name of the lock. This is > because stated like that, "description" might refer to the > locks and not to the file in the sentence. file-descriptor is > more clear I think. (For me it was confusing at first before I realized > what you meant) > > Just my $0.017 > Thanks > There's a big difference between the descriptor and the description. The numerical value you get back from something like open() is a file descriptor. The thing that that value points to internally in the kernel is the file description. It's very important that we do not conflate the two here as these locks are associated with the file description and not the file descriptor. The best way to illustrate this is the interaction with dup() -- see the LWN article on these for a complete overview. -- Jeff Layton