[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5230B7C7.20503@hp.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:34:47 -0400
From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" <aswin@...com>,
"Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] seqlock: Add a new blocking reader type
On 09/11/2013 01:26 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:33:35PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>
>>> Folks, any suggestions on better names? The semantics we are getting is
>> I will welcome any better name suggestion and will incorporate that
>> in the patch.
> FWIW, the suggestions I've seen so far had been
>
> seq_exreadlock() [ex for exclusive]
> seq_exclreadlock() [ditto, and IMO fails the "easily read over the phone"
> test - /sekv-excre...ARRGH/]
> seq_prot_readlock() [prot for protected, as in DLM protected read]
Following the naming convention in seqlock.h that all functions begin
with read_ or write_, is read_seqexcl_lock() look OK to you?
-Longman
--
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