[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130605142545.GB18160@twin.jikos.cz>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 16:25:46 +0200
From: David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
To: Arne Jansen <sensille@....net>
Cc: Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
Chris Mason <clmason@...ionio.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] introduce list_for_each_entry_del
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 08:53:50AM +0200, Arne Jansen wrote:
> On 05.06.2013 04:09, Jörn Engel wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 June 2013 14:44:35 -0400, Jörn Engel wrote:
> >>
> >> Or while_list_drain?
>
> I'm fine with while_list_drain, although a name starting with list_
> like all other list macros would be nice. How about just list_drain?
The list_ prefix makes it imho more readable, we know that list_* are
macros, but 'while_list_drain' does not fit to the group. I'd go for
list_drain or list_drain_entry
david
--
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