Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to file-description locks

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

On 04/21/2014 09:06 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 03:04:10PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> I think what you mean is that there is no need that we expose the name
>> "struct file".  My point is that "struct file" is actually a much
>> _better_ name than "file description".  Heck, "open file object" would
>> be better name than "file description".
> 
> Open file description is what all current standards use.  I'm pretty
> sure really old ones just used open file, 

("open file description" was already in SUSv1 (1994))

> but struct file has never
> been used in an API description.  

Exactly.

> Introducing it now entirely out of
> context is not helpful at all.

In principle, I agree, though it might be helpful for some
people to mention this term in a side-note in, say, open(2).

Cheers,

Michael


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/