Done.

Fixed. Thanks for catching.

A TCP function block has one name and is registered using a number of names or aliases. TCP_FUNCTION_NAME_NUM_MAX is the maximum number of times each TCP function block an be registered under different names.
This does NOT limit the number of TCP function blocks, or the components of the structure.
Example: assume you have a TCP function block blk1 with name "tcp_june2024" and a second one blk2 with "tcp_july2024".
So you might want to register blk1 under the name "tcp_june2024" and "tcp_stable" and register blk2 under the name "tcp_jul2024" and "tcp_latest".
In this case you would use 2 names. So you can't use more than TCP_FUNCTION_NAME_NUM_MAX names. I guess 16 is enough.

I understand. Thanks for the clarity.

First, it was confusing to me that I was thinking something else like these function pointer names inside the struct tcp_function_block at the first glance, given the word use in the comment. That's why I guessed it's a readability problem to me and I recommended the comment update.

Something like below, with the emphasis on word register:

/* Maximum number of names (TCP function block names) a single TCP function block can register. */

Second, I took some time to think about this magic number 16 per the discussion in our group meeting.

1. Clearly, both 8 and 16 are large enough. And there won't need a larger than 8 number in the near future, as 8 is already a roundup number and is more than double of the current status quo.
2. I would like to see (if possible in my life) the reason that someone could possibly update this number to 16 or larger with a persuasive reason.

So I would like to recommend this magic number to 8.

I reduced the constant to 8 and improved the comment describing this constant.