Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 12 Sep 2005 06:25:48 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] cpuset semaphore depth check optimize |
| |
Nikita wrote: > static void cpuset_{down,up}(void);
I started with (void) calls when I first wrote this hack, then changed it to taking a semaphore pointer, intentionally.
The calls: cpuset_down(&cpuset_sem); cpuset_up(&cpuset_sem); exactly replace calls: down(&cpuset_sem); up(&cpuset_sem);
I wanted that visual resemblance.
I agree, it's asymmetric, which is not so good.
But the resemblance is more valuable, in my view.
So I will stick with what I've got, unless I see stronger signs of a concensus to the contrary.
Is that ok?
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401 - 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/
| |