[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] epoll: use wrapper functions
    On Thu, 2010-05-06 at 11:47 -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
    > Since we already have __add_wait_queue(), __add_wait_queue_tail() and
    > __remove_wait_queue() (which all means "locked"), and while I agree in
    > having the exclusive-add wrapped into a function, I much better prefer a:
    > static inline void __add_wait_queue_excl(wait_queue_head_t *head,
    > wait_queue_t *new)
    > {
    > new->flags |= WQ_FLAG_EXCLUSIVE;
    > __add_wait_queue(head, new);
    > }
    > The patch you posted introduces a different naming, which leaves all the
    > other __*() untouched, and wraps the already one-liner __remove_wait_queue()
    > with yet another one-liner.

    I concur, I always get confused by the _locked postfix (and its more
    typing). Also, it goes against the lock data not code paradigm.

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-05-06 20:53    [W:0.022 / U:0.328 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site