linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] async: Add some documentation.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090119045242.73ba210f@infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 19 Jan 2009 04:52:42 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] async: Add some documentation.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 13:27:44 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com> wrote:

> > > 
> > > I had it as that at first. But it is ugly; naming a function
> > > after its arguments is useless; it should be named after what it
> > > does instead.
> > > 
> > > I buy that "special" is not a good name. Would "local" be better?
> > > The name needs to convey that it is for a specific synchronization
> > > context....
> > 
> > Yeah, local is sounds ok - it's certainly more obvious
> > that it's a scope modifier for the synchronisation primitive.
> 
> Hm, I don't like _local too much. How about _subset, or _context, or
> _scope?

or _domain ?

and phrase stuff such that you have synchronization domains?

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/