From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 14 00:15:44 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AAD16A41B; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:15:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 586D213C45D; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:15:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAA3B46C35; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 19:15:43 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:15:43 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" In-Reply-To: <20071213223319.E81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <20071214001219.M86532@fledge.watson.org> References: <200712122021.lBCKLdvt045540@repoman.freebsd.org> <20071213223319.E81630@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Kip Macy , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf files src/sys/netinet tcp_ofld.c tcp_ofld.h tcp_var.h toedev.h src/sys/sys socket.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:15:44 -0000 On Thu, 13 Dec 2007, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > I consider that just for the archives .. > > .. but is there a reason you abbreviated those file names like that? It's > not like we live with 8.3 contrainsts. > > The first time I parsed it as "of ld", then realiazed it should be "off ld" > and then wondered why it wasn't just "offload" like it is "syncache" or > "timewait" or "hostcache"? > > And yes, I wondered the same about the functions names, ... > > Was that spelling inherited from another implementation/standard/whatever? I raised a similar question about function naming -- generally TCP is pretty good about naming functions tcp_foo, and I'd like it if we used that convention here also. The prefix ofld, while unlikely to immediately collide, doesn't follow those conventions. Per out-of-band discussion which I won't rehash in any detail, I'd also prefer if this sort of change were discussed on arch@/net@/etc in advance of commit. For those following this work, Kip has posted the next batch of changes to arch@ soif people could take this opportunity to review them before they go in, that would be great :-). Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge