From: Greg Banks Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 2/14] knfsd: delete per transport Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 17:55:00 +1000 Message-ID: <20070518075500.GJ5104@sgi.com> References: <20070516191951.GH9626@sgi.com> <17996.12924.211214.309207@notabene.brown> <20070518055631.GE5104@sgi.com> <17997.19270.91547.343390@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: Thomas Talpey , Linux NFS Mailing List , Peter Leckie To: Neil Brown Return-path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list2-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HoxIl-00067X-Fk for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 18 May 2007 00:55:03 -0700 Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28] helo=relay.sgi.com ident=[U2FsdGVkX1/TLY0ul9SJzqShkSCAUyvY7+muRzpKY0U=]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1HoxIn-0002z0-RA for nfs@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 18 May 2007 00:55:06 -0700 In-Reply-To: <17997.19270.91547.343390@notabene.brown> List-Id: "Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 04:44:22PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote: > On Friday May 18, gnb@sgi.com wrote: > > > > I considered renaming the existing svc_sock to svc_xprt, which > > would be another horribly unpronouncable identifier(*) but would at > > least be appropriately abstract and consistent with the client. > > > > Then the naming would all be obvious and correct: svc_xprt_foo() > > is a generic transport function, svc_sock_foo() is a more specific > > socket-based transport function used as common code between TCP > > and UDP transports. Yay. > > > > But it would be a much larger patch so I shied away. > > Sensible. > > > > > I'm happy to do the naming any way you want, just let me know. > > I accept that "ipsock" is not accurate (as it is the 'sock' bit that > is significant, the 'ip' is fairly irrelevant) but it is at least > better than tcpip. Another option is > svc_detach_sock / svc_free_sock > > Which avoid mentioned "svc_sock", but still says what you want. > > So go with that, unless you find it objectionable, in which case got > with svc_ipsock_*. I really like having the module at the start and the verb at the end, so I'll go for svc_ipsock_foo(). Greg. -- Greg Banks, R&D Software Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group. Apparently, I'm Bedevere. Which MPHG character are you? I don't speak for SGI. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs