From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964829AbbKCUGN (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:06:13 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46352 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932374AbbKCUGK (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:06:10 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 14:06:08 -0600 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Jiri Kosina Cc: Petr Mladek , Miroslav Benes , Chris J Arges , live-patching@vger.kernel.org, jeyu@redhat.com, Seth Jennings , Vojtech Pavlik , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] livepatch: old_name.number scheme in livepatch sysfs directory Message-ID: <20151103200608.GQ27488@treble.redhat.com> References: <20151102203241.GF27488@treble.redhat.com> <1446505187-28970-1-git-send-email-chris.j.arges@canonical.com> <20151103124440.GK2599@pathway.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 08:57:24PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Tue, 3 Nov 2015, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > Also I would omit the suffix at all when it is the first occurrence. It > > will cause that unique symbols will not be numbered. > > That'd mean that the names (including suffixes) are not stable, because a > particular name that has originally been unique can later be made > non-unique when module brings in a conflicting name. The numbering (and uniqueness) is per-object, so the same symbol name from another module would live in a separate namespace and wouldn't create a conflict. -- Josh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Poimboeuf Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] livepatch: old_name.number scheme in livepatch sysfs directory Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 14:06:08 -0600 Message-ID: <20151103200608.GQ27488@treble.redhat.com> References: <20151102203241.GF27488@treble.redhat.com> <1446505187-28970-1-git-send-email-chris.j.arges@canonical.com> <20151103124440.GK2599@pathway.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jiri Kosina Cc: Petr Mladek , Miroslav Benes , Chris J Arges , live-patching-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, jeyu-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, Seth Jennings , Vojtech Pavlik , linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 08:57:24PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Tue, 3 Nov 2015, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > Also I would omit the suffix at all when it is the first occurrence. It > > will cause that unique symbols will not be numbered. > > That'd mean that the names (including suffixes) are not stable, because a > particular name that has originally been unique can later be made > non-unique when module brings in a conflicting name. The numbering (and uniqueness) is per-object, so the same symbol name from another module would live in a separate namespace and wouldn't create a conflict. -- Josh