| Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/8] perf: Per PMU disable | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Fri, 18 Jun 2010 09:11:58 +0200 |
| |
On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 04:14 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 06:00:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > +static void armpmu_pmu_enable(struct pmu *pmu) > > { > > +static void powerpc_pmu_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu) > > { > > +static void fsl_emb_pmu_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu) > > { > > +static void sh_pmu_pmu_enable(struct pmu *pmu) > > +{ > > +static void sparc_pmu_pmu_enable(struct pmu *pmu) > > { > > +static void x86_pmu_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu) > > { > > > These namings are really bad. Why not just using pmu once > in each names? x86_pmu_enable, etc...
Because some of those were already taken:
static const struct pmu pmu = { .enable = x86_pmu_enable, .disable = x86_pmu_disable,
|