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  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]
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:11:41 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <>
Cc:	LKML <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <>,
	Mike Galbraith <>,
	Paul Mackerras <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] perf/core: Split up pinned and non pinned

* Frederic Weisbecker <> wrote:

> Split up pinned and non-pinned events processing in two helpers
> so that it's more flexible to handle them seperately.

> +static void
> +__perf_event_sched_in_volatile(struct perf_event_context *ctx,
> +			       struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx, int cpu)

Small naming suggestion: 'volatile' is a C keyword and rarely used 
outside of that context in the kernel, which makes this function name a 
bit confusing.

So instead of pinned/volatile, a pinned/flexible naming would be more 
readable, i.e. __perf_event_sched_in_flexible() or so.

Also, most of the static functions in kernel/perf_event.c could lose 
their perf_event_ prefix - we already know it's a perf thing, right? 
That will shorten quite a few function names there.

These functions would turn into __sched_in_pinned()/__sched_in_flexible().


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists