User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Lock naming

Lock naming

Posted Sep 29, 2009 20:42 UTC (Tue) by niv (guest, #8656)
In reply to: Lock naming by nettings
Parent article: The realtime preemption mini-summit

"Well, some locks are to heavy, some are too lightweight. Since these are Just Right, they are obviously goldilocks."

Just have to applaud :).

Humor aside, we really do have to get the naming right - there's enough confusion as it is, as Jon points out. Lock names really need to be self-explanatory, or at very least, imply behavior that's somewhat in the ballpark of actual behavior. Spinlocks that can sleep should have big, flashing red neon warning signs or some equivalent thereof in their name, ideally.


(Log in to post comments)

Lock naming

Posted Sep 29, 2009 21:08 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

Call them sleepy locks then.

Lock naming

Posted Sep 30, 2009 12:03 UTC (Wed) by nevets (subscriber, #11875) [Link]

goldielocks was indeed mentioned. But the sleepy locks were not. I'll have to have Jon add that one to the list of possibilities. :-)

Lock naming

Posted Oct 11, 2009 16:34 UTC (Sun) by efexis (guest, #26355) [Link]

Sleepy sounds like they might run a bit slow and probably need to sleep... if the locks may end up sleeping due to external conditions then it should be a narcolocksy :-)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds