This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to "open file description locks"
- From: Jeff Layton <jlayton at redhat dot com>
- To: Boaz Harrosh <openosd at gmail dot com>
- Cc: linux-fsdevel at vger dot kernel dot org, linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, samba-technical at lists dot samba dot org, Ganesha NFS List <nfs-ganesha-devel at lists dot sourceforge dot net>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead dot org>, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>, Stefan Metzmacher <metze at samba dot org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto at amacapital dot net>, Frank Filz <ffilzlnx at mindspring dot com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso at mit dot edu>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 10:55:20 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] locks: rename file-private locks to "open file description locks"
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1398169383-10743-1-git-send-email-jlayton at redhat dot com> <5356808B dot 3040303 at gmail dot com>
On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:45:31 +0300
Boaz Harrosh <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 04/22/2014 03:23 PM, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > We're going to have to live with these for a long time, so it's
> > important that we be happy with the names before we're stuck with them.
> > The consensus on the lists so far is that they should be rechristened as
> > "open file description locks".
> I completely agree with the rename. (Though could you please post
> the rest of the rename patches for review)
> Just a very small nit. My native language is not English but I would
> rather you use "file-descriptor" (with an '-' as well) and not
> use "description" in the English name of the lock. This is
> because stated like that, "description" might refer to the
> locks and not to the file in the sentence. file-descriptor is
> more clear I think. (For me it was confusing at first before I realized
> what you meant)
> Just my $0.017
There's a big difference between the descriptor and the description.
The numerical value you get back from something like open() is a file
descriptor. The thing that that value points to internally in the
kernel is the file description. It's very important that we do not
conflate the two here as these locks are associated with the file
description and not the file descriptor.
The best way to illustrate this is the interaction with dup() -- see
the LWN article on these for a complete overview.
Jeff Layton <email@example.com>