Re: PROPOSAL: Split uiomove into uiopeek, uioskip

[Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>]

> On May 9, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Taylor R Campbell <campbell+netbsd-tech-kern%mumble.net@localhost> wrote:
> 
> - uiopeek leaves uio itself untouched (it may modify the source/target
>  buffers but it's idempotent).

Hm… I’m having second thoughts about uiopeek(), as well.  It implies a direction (“peek” feels like “read”, and “write” would feel more like a “poke”).  I think uiocopy() is a better name, and I think it is sufficiently different from uiomove() (“move” implies a sort of destructive-ness that “copy” does not).

-- thorpej