lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] usb driver for intellon based PLC like devolo dlan duo
On Sat, 18 Apr 2009, David Miller wrote:

> From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:07:52 +0200 (CEST)
>
> > FWIW, I think it's pretty common to name static functions in a .c file,
> > which perform auxiliary function, not really specific to the context
> > without the respective context-prefix.
>
> I'll remember to think of you next time I run grep on the tree.

Thanks David, very nice of you:-)

Once an MMC driver has been submitted for a specific platform, which
apparently has been derived from an MMC driver for a similar platform. And
the submitter has preserved the function prefix... So most functions in
the two drivers were called equally. Now that was bad, and I was the one
to complain about it, no idea what was the end result with that driver
though.

What I actually meant is that I don't necessarily consider it very
inconvenient if different drivers have functions like reg_write() or
whatever. I cannot think of many situations when this can be confusing. If
you are working with that file and see a call to reg_write() you know
where to look for it. If you have an Oops in that function - you just look
one function up in the backtrace. One of the cases that might be difficult
is if you have an Oops in such a function without a backtrace and it is in
a module. Ok, in this case it might be difficult to find out what that
was. Otherwise - why would you want to grep the sources for such a
function?

Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-18 21:57    [W:0.046 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site