Re: [PATCH 00/30] C/R OpenVZ/Virtuozzo style

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	xemul@parallels.com, serue@us.ibm.com, dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	orenl@cs.columbia.edu, hch@infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/30] C/R OpenVZ/Virtuozzo style
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:44:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090414134420.GC27163@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090414122906.GA20201@x200.localdomain>

* Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:39:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 13 Apr 2009, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > 
> > > Well, in OpenVZ everything is in kernel/cpt/ and prefixed with "cpt_"
> > > and "rst_".
> > 
> > So?
> > 
> > We're not merging OpenVZ code _either_.
> 
> This is to give example of other prefixes: cpt_ and rst_
> Are they fine?

Not really. 'rst' can be easily mistaken for 'reset' and neither 
really tells me at a glance what they do. They are also quite 
tongue-twisters.

See my namespace analysis and suggestions from yesterday for a 
proper naming scheme.

The key i believe is to move away from this singular 'the world is 
all about checkpoint and restore', and move it to a IMHO clearer 
state_*() type of naming which really isolates all these kernel 
state save/restore management APIs from other kernel APIs. (See my 
mail from yesterday for details.)

kstate_*() would be another, perhaps even clearer naming scheme. 
I.e.:

  kstate_checkpoint_XYZ()
  kstate_restore_XYZ()
  kstate_collect_XYZ()
  kstate_dump_XYZ()
  kstate_image_XYZ()
  ...

Just _look_ at them - they are expressive at a glance, and 
reasonably short. That is the kind of first-time impression
we need, not a 'wtf?' moment.

I just checked, there's zero hits on "git grep \<kstate_" in the 
kernel, so it's a pristine namespace. IMHO, go wild ...

	Ingo