[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:07:36 -0700
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] cpumask: introduce zalloc_cpumask_var
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 14:50:36 -0700 Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> bool alloc_cpumask_var_node(cpumask_var_t *mask, gfp_t flags, int node);
>> bool alloc_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t *mask, gfp_t flags);
>> +bool zalloc_cpumask_var_node(cpumask_var_t *mask, gfp_t flags, int node);
>> +bool zalloc_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t *mask, gfp_t flags);
>> void alloc_bootmem_cpumask_var(cpumask_var_t *mask);
>
> ick. cpumask_var_node_zalloc() would be better.
>
> Yes, the other functions were incorrectly named, but that's no reason
> to incorrectly name these also.
problem is that we would using alloc_cpumask_var and zalloc_cpumask in different case.
so we may need to change these name at the same time. otherwise will cause confusing. No?
YH
--
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