Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:06:52 +0200 | From | Jesper Juhl <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] rename locking functions - fix a blunder in initial patches |
| |
On 8/19/05, Nathan Scott <nathans@sgi.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2005 at 11:09:33PM +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > ... > > have if getting rid of the defines is prefered, then that's something that > > can easily be done later. > > I tend to agree with Christoph on this - this level of internal API > churn is unnecessary and can be error prone (as you cunningly showed ;) > - please just leave it as is, and move on to greener pastures. >
If that's the general oppinion, then sure, I'll leave it alone. Just thought it would be nice to make things more consistently named.
I'll leave it in the capable hands of akpm and not press the issue any further.
-- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |