Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 7 Dec 2005 11:49:00 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/21] hrtimer - High-resolution timer subsystem |
| |
* Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >so i believe that: > > > > - 'struct ktimer', 'struct ktimeout' > > > >is in theory superior naming, compared to: > > > > - 'struct ptimer', 'struct timer_list' > > > > Just curious -- why the "k" thing?
yeah. 'struct timer' and 'struct timeout' is even better. I tried it on real code and sometimes it looked a bit funny: often we have a 'timeout' parameter somewhere that is a scalar or a timeval/timespec. So at least for variable names it was useful to have it in this form:
struct timeout *ktimeout;
struct timer *ktimer;
otherwise it looked OK. This is also in line with most other 'object names' we have in the kernel: struct inode, struct dentry.
Ingo - 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/
| |