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

Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups + docs

From:  Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>
To:  Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org>
Subject:  Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups + docs
Date:  Fri, 24 Feb 2012 09:04:23 +0100
Message-ID:  <20120224080423.GA814@elte.hu>
Cc:  Paul Mackerras <paulus-AT-samba.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-zytor.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt-AT-goodmis.org>, Jason Baron <jbaron-AT-redhat.com>, a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl, mathieu.desnoyers-AT-efficios.com, davem-AT-davemloft.net, ddaney.cavm-AT-gmail.com, akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org
Archive-link:  Article


* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Seriously, I don't understand why you don't just use the 
> obvious name. The data structure is named "static_key". The 
> things that change it are named "static_key_inc()" or 
> something. So a name like "static_key_true()" is simply 
> *better*, isn't it?

Yes, you are right, in hindsight it's indeed obviously and 
trivially better :-/

> It's not just about less confusion, it's actually about just 
> having consistent naming.

Okay. I sent out the slightly reworked patch that gets rid of 
this confusion and makes it all consistent.

Thanks,

	Ingo


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2012, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds