lists.openwall.net   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  linux-cve-announce  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]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1511041124530.4032@nanos>
Date:	Wed, 4 Nov 2015 11:33:51 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait)
 implementation

On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> +
> +extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q);
> +extern void swake_up_all(struct swait_queue_head *q);
> +extern void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q);

I intentionally named these functions swait_wake* in my initial
implementation for two reasons:

  - typoing wake_up vs. swake_up only emits a compiler warning and does
    not break the build
    
  - I really prefer new infrastructure to have a consistent prefix
    which reflects the "subsystem". That's simpler to read and simpler
    to grep for.

> +extern void __prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
> +extern void prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
> +extern long prepare_to_swait_event(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state);
> +
> +extern void __finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);
> +extern void finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait);

Can we please go with the original names?

swait_prepare()
swait_prepare_locked()
swait_finish()
swait_finish_locked()

Hmm?

> +#define swait_event(wq, condition)					\

Here we have the same swait vs. wait problem as above. So either we
come up with a slightly different name or have an explicit type check
in __swait_event event.

Thanks,

	tglx


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ