Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:54:15 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] improve the first percpu chunk allocation |
| |
* Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 February 2009 07:46:59 Ingo Molnar wrote: > > kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c: In function ‘graph_trace_close’: > > kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c:836: error: implicit declaration of function ‘percpu_free’ > > > > that's free_percpu() now, right? > > > > Btw., why was this rename done? We generally standardize on > > hierarchical names, going from the more general to the more > > specific names, left to right. > > Agreed, but we had both, doing identical things, and > free_percpu outnumbered percpu_free by a significant factor > (about 40 to 5 IIRC).
40 places to rename => peanuts! :-)
> Simple pragmatism, and it matches alloc_percpu.
it also matches other allocator mis-namings in mm/*.c. I concur.
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/
| |