Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761809AbZD3KnR (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:43:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753283AbZD3KnB (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:43:01 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:39941 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751437AbZD3KnA (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 06:43:00 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:42:40 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Andrew Morton , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, greg@kroah.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, dougthompson@xmission.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/21] amd64_edac: add f10-and-later methods-p3 Message-ID: <20090430104240.GA6769@elte.hu> References: <1241024107-14535-1-git-send-email-borislav.petkov@amd.com> <1241024107-14535-14-git-send-email-borislav.petkov@amd.com> <20090429182255.GD8321@elte.hu> <20090429120501.ae005dc4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090429192326.GA14652@elte.hu> <20090429124228.8677d4eb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090429195357.GB17021@elte.hu> <20090429204730.GA24298@elte.hu> <20090430100100.GB20167@aftab> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090430100100.GB20167@aftab> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1722 Lines: 49 * Borislav Petkov wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:47:30PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > [..] > > > What i point out below is precisely what you say is ineligible > > under: > > > > > > Of course, we don't have to use StinkyIdentifiers anywhere else. > > > > I'd extend that rule to say that StinkyIdentifiers should only be > > used for hw API definitions/constants - macros, enums - not really > > local variable names. The moment they are allowed into local > > variables the stuff below happens. > > to agree with Andrew, at a certain point in time I thought that > having the same register bit names as in the docs would be > preferential when you look at the docs and what the code does. But > Ingo's also quite right: we can't have "normal kernel coding > style" and StinkyIdentifiers > :) in the same source file. > > /me locking himself back in the patch creation basement. I think you can still cleanly use those identifiers for hardware constants, register offsets and similar. But if it shows up in a variable (or function) name, it has spread too far IMHO :-) And it's not like we dont have our own historic mistakes in that area, right in the heart of Linux - just type: git grep Page mm/*.c and cringe. IIRC i might even have added a new method or two to that array of CrappyPageAPIs, many years ago. (back in the days when i wrote lot of crappy code myself ;-) Oh, PageHighMem() it is. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/