On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 3:43 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think I prefer to hew close to the C naming. Is there prior art > where Rust names deviate from C names? If it is a name that exists in the standard library and that we have to use (e.g. for another standard type/trait), then sometimes we pick that name instead of the kernel one. For certain things, like constructors, we try to follow the usual Rust conventions. Moreover, sometimes there has been arguments about the chance to improve naming on Rust abstractions vs. the underlying APIs, e.g. `iget_locked()` vs. `get_or_create_inode()`. But, generally, we stick to the C names unless there is a good reason. It depends on not just the code, but also the C side maintainers and their plans. Cheers, Miguel
