On Wed, Apr 24, 2024, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:15:47PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > ... > > I almost wonder if we should just pick a prefix that's less obviously > > connected > > to KVM and/or selftests, but unique and short. > > > > How about kvmsft_ ? It's based on the ksft_ prefix of kselftest.h. Maybe > it's too close to ksft though and would be confusing when using both in > the same test?
I would prefer something short, and for whatever reason I have a mental block with ksft. I always read it as "k soft", which is completely nonsensical :-) > I'm not a huge fan of capital letters, but we could also do something like > MALLOC()/CALLOC(). Hmm, I'm not usually a fan either, but that could actually work quite well in this case. It would be quite intuitive, easy to visually parse whereas tmalloc() vs malloc() kinda looks like a typo, and would more clearly communicate that they're macros.
