On Thu, 20 May 2004, Garance Drosehn wrote: > On Thu, 20 May 2004 14:24:11 +0200, Thomas Moestl <t.moestl_at_tu-bs.de> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2004/05/18 at 12:57:34 -0700, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > to answer question 2... > > > nothing.. in my sources I renamed it to cpu_exit2() > > > > The name probably derives from the fact that it needs to be called > > after the sched lock is obtained, as was mentioned in the commit > > message. but the naming conventions we use has 'sched' to mean that it is related to the scheduler. Probably a scheduler specific callout, just as 'cpu_' means a callout to a cpu-specific mechanism. cpu_sched_ indicates that it is a per-cpu/per-scheduler special case callout. in fac tit is not it is prely for sparc64 use and it is in exit so cpu_exit_{something} would be in order.. We also have historical examples of using mumbble() and mumble2() when a function needs to be called in 2 parts due to some external requirement, so cpu_exit() and cpu_exit2() would be the names by my logic.. certainly _sched_ is wrong.. > > Maybe call it: cpu_exit_postsched() > :-) it is not post_sched maybe cpu_exit_locked() would be more descriptive.Received on Thu May 20 2004 - 10:58:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:54 UTC