Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 01/13] seqnum_ops: Introduce Sequence Number Ops | From | Shuah Khan <> | Date | Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:17:27 -0700 |
| |
On 11/12/20 5:36 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 12:23:03PM -0700, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> Agreed: this is a clear wrapping sequence counter. It's only abuse would >>> be using it in a place where wrapping actually is _not_ safe. (bikeshed: >>> can we call it wrap_u32 and wrap_u64?) >> >> Still like seqnum_ops. >> >> There is seqcount_t in seqlock.h which is a totally different feature. > > Yes, and that's why this new thing, whatever it is called should not > have the word "sequence" in it. People will get it confused.
Any suggestions for name. I am bad with coming up with names. How does Statcnt API and struct statcnt along the lines of your name suggestions in your previous email?
> "ops" in Linux means "vector of methods", like a_ops, f_op, i_op, fl_ops. >
We also have "this_cpu_ops, atomic_ops, local_ops" etc. core-api.
The ops in the name is to keep with that nomenclature since these are atomic ops.
thanks, -- Shuah
| |