Em Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 01:27:01PM +0100, Ingo Molnar escreveu: > * Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Em Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 04:28:04PM +0100, Borislav Petkov escreveu: > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:05:24PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > > Naming is a bit hard, to keep it small, descriptive, as API can lead > > > > people to think about other kinds of kernel APIs (syscalls?), "fskapi" > > > > to mean "fs based kernel API" would perhaps be more descriptive? A > > > > longer (more descriptive) possibility would be "linux-fskapi". > > > Yeah, you can't have fskapi because we'll add other stuff to it > > > (see the diffstat I sent you last week) so not filesystem stuff > > > only. So I think "kapi" is as generic and as fitting as it gets. > > > We can use the "kernel-api" variant but I think the "k" is enough.
> > I think is that it is too generic, the other stuff you mention is > > not really "kapi" at all. > > The rest, things like util.c, usage.c, rbtree.c, hash, strlist, etc > > are all, well, utilities that we got from the kernel, from git, or > > that were created for perf, could get a tools/lib/util/ generic name > > and be outside the one with the description agreed above. > > But they are not "helper methods to interface with the Linux kernel" > > at all. > I don't think those other bits should go into this library. rbtree > should go into lib/rbtree/, command-line bits into lib/cmdline/, build > system helpers into lib/build/, etc. Agreed. > Merging unrelated things into a single library is a user-space disease > we need not repeat. Agreed. > I'd also not expose any of this externally but straight link it into > the individual utilities - that way it does not matter that it's a > nice, topical, fine-grained set of functionality. Agreed. > I don't think we are ready for (nor do we want the overhead of) > maintaining a library ABI at this stage. Agreed. > Once things slow down and it's all so robust that we've had at most a > handful of commits in tools/lib/ in a full year we can think about > exporting it, maybe ... Agreed. :-) Lets experiment at having things at the right granularity, even if it involves many, directly linked, like libperf.a, libraries, one at a time, starting with fskapi (or whatever name ends up being preferred for this initial one). - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
