Re: [virtio-comment] RE: [virtio-dev] RE: [PATCH v12 03/10] content: Rename confusing queue_notify_data and vqn names

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Apr 07 2023, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 03:58:55PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
>> For sure "cookie" is better than "config_data" and I don't have objection to "cookie".
>> 
>> But I disagree to the claim that "identifier" is less good than "cookie".
>> 
>> It is pointless debate of "identifier" vs "cookie".
>> 
>> The union format is very useful to describe this crisply, I will use it.
>
> I guess I'm fine with "cookie" in that in CS it is by now widely
> understood to mean "some opaque data".
> identifier comes from "identical", so implies a 1:1 mapping IMO.

Agreed, a "cookie" is not the same as an "identifier", although it may
contain one.

>
>
> The logic behind using a cookie is that it's a bit similar
> to host cookie from ccw.
> However, with ccw host cookie is used unconditionally, as
> opposed to depending on the flag.
>
>
>
>> Do you prefer to rename F_CONFIG_DATA To F_CONFIG_COOKIE?
>
> It should all be consistent, but I worry about ccw which uses cookies
> unconditionally. I am fine with leaving it as F_CONFIG_DATA for now
> unless we see a good way to avoid confusion for ccw.

Yes, please leave it as F_CONFIG_DATA, as we're just putting some "data"
there in the end (and F_CONFIG_COOKIE might indeed be confusing for the
ccw case.)