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 <[email protected]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
|
|