[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49C752AF.7040706@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:13:19 +0900
From: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Rename __task_delta_exec() to task_delta_exec_locked()
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-23 at 14:11 +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
>> Externing function with prefix "__" is unpleasant.
>> This patch renames the function and fix the caller.
>> This change is desirable for other fix that against posix clocks,
>> since the fix introduces another __task_delta_exec() which is static.
>
> There's nothing wrong with __ prefixed functions, the core kernel is
> stuffed with them, and its a well known prefix for functions that need
> special care.
I often suppose that the functions with __ prefix is used for a kind of
(local) subroutine that mostly used internally in the *.c file, and that
therefore it is often defined as static (or static inline).
I also suppose that __Func() followed by Func() is called from Func()
(and its relatives, like Func_foo() or Func_bar() etc., if exists)
as a common core part of Func().
> Furthermore your argument seems contradictory in that it
> introduces one.
I thought it is acceptable since the introduced one is static.
Still I feel uneasy about the non-static __Func(), however it is
easy to fix with a little patients.
Wait a moment for next patch (it will be a single patch, v3).
Thanks,
H.Seto
--
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