8000 Rename appid and app_id to processid by alexandruradovici · Pull Request #3291 · tock/tock · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

Rename appid and app_id to processid #3291

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 12, 2022

Conversation

alexandruradovici
Copy link
Contributor
@alexandruradovici alexandruradovici commented Oct 11, 2022

Pull Request Overview

This pull request renames the usage of appid and app_id of type ProcessId to processid.

This is now useful as the AppID pull request was merged and the AppID now has a different meaning now from the ProcessId. Most usages of appid and app_id actually are referring ProcessId.

Testing Strategy

N/A

TODO or Help Wanted

N/A

Documentation Updated

  • Updated the relevant files in /docs, or no updates are required.

Formatting

  • Ran make prepush.

@github-actions github-actions bot added kernel risc-v RISC-V architecture labels Oct 11, 2022
Copy link
Contributor
@bradjc bradjc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree, this seems like the time to finally make this change. When we changed the type to what is now ProcessId we intentionally did not change the variable names to reduce the complexity of that change and hopefully reduce the potential for mistakes. But with proper app id now, seems like now is the time to update the variable names.

Copy link
Contributor
@hudson-ayers hudson-ayers left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have not reviewed every file in this change but I definitely agree with this conceptually

Copy link
Member
@ppannuto ppannuto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 and same as Hudson re review 😅

@bradjc
Copy link
Contributor
bradjc commented Oct 12, 2022

bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor
bors bot commented Oct 12, 2022

@bors bors bot merged commit 4452806 into tock:master Oct 12, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kernel risc-v RISC-V architecture
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants
0