(cc list trimmed) On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 11:55 -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:04:14 +0200 > Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Yes they are some names discrepancies, thats a big deal. > > > > And we have alloc_skb() / kfree_skb() / skb_clone() > > > > Why not skb_alloc() / skb_free() / skb_clone() ? > > > > Some people actually know current code by name of functions, they dont > > want to change their mind and having to grep include files and git log > > to learn the new names of an old function, especially when traveling > > and using a laptop. > > I agree. > > Also, it makes sense to introduce a more consistent name for a function > when it's improved in some way and the callers need to be adjusted or > re-checked. > > That way, the old name can be phased out as the code is made compatible > with the new function.
That can also be done, as was done with this series, with backward compatible #defines. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
