use less confusing names for iov_iter direction initializers

READ/WRITE proved to be actively confusing - the meanings are
"data destination, as used with read(2)" and "data source, as
used with write(2)", but people keep interpreting those as
"we read data from it" and "we write data to it", i.e. exactly
the wrong way.

Call them ITER_DEST and ITER_SOURCE - at least that is harder
to misinterpret...

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions

diff --git a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c
index 21b9c850a382..28b2a1fa25ab 100644
--- a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c
+++ b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-back.c
@@ -129,13 +129,13 @@ static bool pvcalls_conn_back_read(void *opaque)
 	if (masked_prod < masked_cons) {
 		vec[0].iov_base = data->in + masked_prod;
 		vec[0].iov_len = wanted;
-		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 1, wanted);
+		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_DEST, vec, 1, wanted);
 	} else {
 		vec[0].iov_base = data->in + masked_prod;
 		vec[0].iov_len = array_size - masked_prod;
 		vec[1].iov_base = data->in;
 		vec[1].iov_len = wanted - vec[0].iov_len;
-		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, READ, vec, 2, wanted);
+		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_DEST, vec, 2, wanted);
 	}
 
 	atomic_set(&map->read, 0);
@@ -188,13 +188,13 @@ static bool pvcalls_conn_back_write(struct sock_mapping *map)
 	if (pvcalls_mask(prod, array_size) > pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size)) {
 		vec[0].iov_base = data->out + pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size);
 		vec[0].iov_len = size;
-		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 1, size);
+		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_SOURCE, vec, 1, size);
 	} else {
 		vec[0].iov_base = data->out + pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size);
 		vec[0].iov_len = array_size - pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size);
 		vec[1].iov_base = data->out;
 		vec[1].iov_len = size - vec[0].iov_len;
-		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, WRITE, vec, 2, size);
+		iov_iter_kvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_SOURCE, vec, 2, size);
 	}
 
 	atomic_set(&map->write, 0);