[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200703121925.55616.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:25:54 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...il.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kthread_should_stop_check_freeze
On Monday, 12 March 2007 14:24, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 03/12, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> On Monday, 12 March 2007 09:14, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >>> Can we get better name for this function?
> >> Well, I took the name from the Oleg's message. Can you please suggest
> >> something?
> >
> > Well, kthread_should_stop_check_freeze() is really awful, I agree :)
> > We need something better, but I can't suggest anything.
>
> not much better, but what about kthread_should_stop_or_freeze() ?
IMO this suggests that the thread will either stop or freeze itself, but the
freezing part is not unconditional.
I was thinking of kthread_should_stop_freezable() .
Greetings,
Rafael
-
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