[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:0.055 / U:17.992 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site