On Thu, 22 Nov 2018, Jessica Yu wrote: > +++ Miroslav Benes [22/11/18 11:19 +0100]: > >On Wed, 21 Nov 2018, Jessica Yu wrote: > > > >> The module loader internally works with both exported symbols > >> represented as struct kernel_symbol, as well as Elf symbols from a > >> module's symbol table. It's hard to distinguish sometimes which type of > >> symbol we're handling given that some helper function names are not > >> consistent or helpful. Take get_ksymbol() for instance - are we > >> looking for an exported symbol or a kallsyms symbol here? Or symname() > >> and kernel_symbol_name() - which function handles an exported symbol and > >> which one an Elf symbol? > >> > >> Clean up and unify the function naming scheme a bit to make it clear > >> which kind of symbol we're handling. This change only affects static > >> functions internal to the module loader. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jessica Yu <j...@kernel.org> > > > >Great. It should help a lot. Pity we cannot rename find_symbol() as well. > > > >I have only a naming nit. I think it is nice to have > ><verb>_exported_<noun> convention. New kallsyms_ names don't hold it > >though. Wouldn't it be better to be consistent and have > >find_kallsyms_symbol() instead of kallsyms_find_symbol()? Or we could do > >the opposite and have a "namespace" prefix first. That is, > >exported_<verb>_<noun>. However, I don't like it that much. > > > >To be honest, your approach may be the best in the end. > > > >What do you think? > > Hi Miroslav, thank you for the comment! > > Yeah, that bothered me partially too. And a lot of existing helper > functions in the module loader already have a <verb>_ type prefix. > > Hm, how about we use <symbol_type>_* prefixes if we are just extracting a > value, and <verb>_* prefixes for functions actually performing an > action? > Kallsyms: > > kallsyms_symbol_name() > kallsyms_symbol_value() > > find_kallsyms_symbol() > find_kallsyms_symbol_value() > > etc. > > Exported syms: > > kernel_symbol_name() > kernel_symbol_value() > > lookup_exported_symbol() > check_exported_symbol() > > etc.
Looks good to me. > I had left the kernel_symbol_* functions alone since I guess they do > describe what they're handling, they're handling struct kernel_symbol's. > But maybe I will change that to exported_symbol_name() and > exported_symbol_value() to be consistent with the naming scheme.. I don't have any preference here. Reasons for both options are valid. Miroslav
