[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87prefj386.wl%vmayatsk@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 13:20:09 +0200
From: Vitaly Mayatskikh <v.mayatskih@...il.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Vitaly Mayatskikh <v.mayatskih@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Split wait_noreap_copyout()
At Mon, 11 May 2009 12:20:50 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > -static int wait_noreap_copyout(struct wait_opts *wo, struct task_struct *p,
> > - pid_t pid, uid_t uid, int why, int status)
> > +static int wait_copyout(struct wait_opts *wo, struct task_struct *p,
> > + pid_t pid, uid_t uid, int why, int status, int signal)
>
> Nice cleanups. Would be nice to fix the naming here too while at it.
>
> Right now it's two verbs and a straightforward reading of it suggest
> that we 'wait for some copyout to occur', which is nonsensical and
> confusing.
>
> So please put the main action as the first verb (this is an internal
> symbol so no subsystem differentiator is needed). Something like:
>
> copy_wait_opts_to_user()
>
> ... and it becomes a whole lot easier to read. This matches the
> copy*to_user idioms we have elsewhere so it nicely wibes with the
> sound of those.
Sure, will repost with naming fixes soon.
--
wbr, Vitaly
--
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