From: hverkuil@xs4all.nl (Hans Verkuil) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:58:16 +0200 Subject: [PATCH RFC v3 10/16] media: rename link source/sink to pad0_source/pad1_sink In-Reply-To: <30472f0a7f52ee834978c70cbecc5c035ce20f71.1439410053.git.mchehab@osg.samsung.com> References: <30472f0a7f52ee834978c70cbecc5c035ce20f71.1439410053.git.mchehab@osg.samsung.com> Message-ID: <55CC4E18.7080605@xs4all.nl> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 08/12/15 22:14, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Change the internal namespace for links between two pads to > have the "pad" there. > > We're also numbering it, as a common constructor is to do > things like: > > if (link->port1.type != MEDIA_GRAPH_PAD) > continue; > if (link->pad1_sink->entity == entity) > /* do something */ > > by preserving the number, we keep consistency between > port1 and pad1_sink, and port0 and pad0_source. I would really leave this patch out. As long as sink and source are consistently used for pads (and they are), then I see no benefit at all to this change. Another reason why I don't like this is that pad0_ and pad1_ are actually confusing since they suggested to me when I first read it that pad0_ referred to the pad with index 0 and pad1_ referred to the pad with index 1. That's obviously not the case, but it does mean that the prefix doesn't really make things clearer. I would just stick with source and sink. Regards, Hans