Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Oct 2002 21:21:23 +0200 (CEST) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Rename _bh to _softirq |
| |
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Maksim (Max) Krasnyanskiy wrote:
> Old BHs have been almost completely replaced with tasklets and softirqs. > Should we then rename _bh to _softirq ? > i.e > local_bh_disable() -> local_softirq_disable() > spin_lock_bh() -> spin_lock_softirq() > bh_lock_sock() -> softirq_sock_lock() > etc
i wanted to do this as part of the irqlock cleanups, but generally we dont change existing interfaces unless it's really universally agreed upon. Eg. we had cli() around for a *long* time although it's an x86 (-mostly) instruction name. But yes, i agree, and there are a number of other renames that would make perfect sense.
Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |