Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Nick Piggin <[email protected]> wrote:
Ingo Molnar wrote:
so i believe that:
- 'struct ktimer', 'struct ktimeout'
is in theory superior naming, compared to:
- 'struct ptimer', 'struct timer_list'
Just curious -- why the "k" thing?
yeah. 'struct timer' and 'struct timeout' is even better. I tried it on
Oh good, glad you think so :)
real code and sometimes it looked a bit funny: often we have a 'timeout'
parameter somewhere that is a scalar or a timeval/timespec. So at least
Sure... hmm, the names timeout and timer themselves have something
vagely wrong about them, but I can't quite place my finger on it,
not a real worry though...
Maybe it is that timeout is an end result, but timer is a mechanism.
So maybe it should be 'struct interval', 'struct timeout';
or 'struct timer', 'struct timeout_timer'.
But I don't know really, it isn't a big deal.
Nick
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
