On 07/20/2012 03:30 PM, Khalid Aziz wrote:As I think more about it, existence of aliases could also potentially create confusion where someone adding new code to kernel chooses to use the long name instead. Maybe unless we can make a clean break from long names, it is not worth doing this and that is going to be problematic because of the existing usage in userspace programs.
This patch is based upon earlier discussion at
You are right that EFI specification uses exactly these long names for
the constants, but does that mean kernel must also use the exact same
long constant names? I can see doing that for the sake of consistency.
At the same time, can we make the kernel code more readable and retain
compatibility with existing API by using aliases? I slightly prefer
making kernel code more readable, but I could go either way.
I think it makes the kernel code less readable, because now you not only need to understand the kernel code and the EFI spec, but also how the two maps onto each other. The fact that you then have to introduce aliases indicates to me that you're doing something actively broken.