[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87lhzhfgxd.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:17:34 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>,
Rodrigo Campos <rodrigo@...g.com.ar>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/18] perf sort: Compare addresses if no symbol info
Hi Arnaldo,
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:39:07 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:35:28PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 04:38:49PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
>> > > +static int64_t _sort__addr_cmp(u64 left_ip, u64 right_ip)
>> > > +{
>> > > + return (int64_t)(right_ip - left_ip);
>> > > +}
>> > > +
>> >
>> > what's the reason for the leading '_' in the name?
>>
>> Yeah, I'm curious as well, the convention is to only use double _ in
>> front of functions when it does a little less than a function of the
>> same name without such prefix, like locking, etc.
>>
>> - Arnaldo
>>
>> > otherwise:
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
>
> Yeah, I'll apply it, it just keeps whatever convention that is there
> already.
Exactly. It's not a top-level sort/compare function, hence the leading
'_', I guess.
> I'll take a stab at fixing it all up after merging this
> --whatever-the-cumulate-option-becomes new code :-)
Thank you!
Namhyung
--
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