[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611201030400.3692@woody.osdl.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:32:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, akpm@...l.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] WorkStruct: Separate delayable and non-delayable
events.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Stefan Richter wrote:
> David Howells wrote:
> > Separate delayable work items from non-delayable work items be splitting them
> > into a separate structure (dwork_struct), which incorporates a work_struct and
> > the timer_list removed from work_struct.
> ...
> > if (!delay)
> > - rc = queue_work(ata_wq, &ap->port_task);
> > + rc = queue_dwork(ata_wq, &ap->port_task);
> > else
> > rc = queue_delayed_work(ata_wq, &ap->port_task, delay);
> ...
>
> A consequent (if somewhat silly) name for queue_delayed_work would be
> queue_delayed_dwork, since it requires a struct dwork_struct.
Yes. Please don't use "dwork" as a name AT ALL. Not in "dwork_struct" and
not in "queue_dwork()".
"dwork" just sounds d[w]orky. More importantly, we don't use short-hand
that isn't obvious, unless there is some industry-standard and old meaning
to it that everybody understands. "delayed_work" may be more typing, but
anybody who needs to type things that fast had better slow down anyway to
_think_.
No excuses for short and unreadable names.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists