lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [patch] sched_clock(): cleanups
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 09:58 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
    > On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 09:39:33AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > On Fri, 2007-05-25 at 13:05 +0530, Satyam Sharma wrote:
    > > > On 5/25/07, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
    > >
    > > > > call_r_s_f() still needs an urgent rerenaming though =B-)
    > > >
    > > > So does "call_r_s_f_here()" :-)
    > >
    > > That name makes me think of INTERCAL's 'DO COME FROM' statement.
    > > And any code that makes one think of INTERCAL is say,.. special.. :-)
    >
    > Propose a better way to code this then? It's not my fault that dealing with
    > callbacks in C is so messy. _here just massages one callback
    > prototype (smp_call_function's) into another (cpufreq's) because
    > both callbacks do the same in this case.

    I see you point; however a function called:
    call_<some_other_function>_here() just doesn't make sense. It says as
    much as: we should call some_other_function() but for some reason we
    dont.

    > The r_s_f BTW stands for resync_sc_freq which is a function earlier
    > in the file and should be familiar to a serious reader.

    It was.

    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-05-25 10:19    [W:2.286 / U:0.156 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site