Re: [PATCH 1/4] WorkStruct: Separate delayable and non-delayable events.

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006, Stefan Richter wrote:

> David Howells wrote:
> > Separate delayable work items from non-delayable work items be splitting them
> > into a separate structure (dwork_struct), which incorporates a work_struct and
> > the timer_list removed from work_struct.
> ...
> >  	if (!delay)
> > -		rc = queue_work(ata_wq, &ap->port_task);
> > +		rc = queue_dwork(ata_wq, &ap->port_task);
> >  	else
> >  		rc = queue_delayed_work(ata_wq, &ap->port_task, delay);
> ...
> 
> A consequent (if somewhat silly) name for queue_delayed_work would be
> queue_delayed_dwork, since it requires a struct dwork_struct.

Yes. Please don't use "dwork" as a name AT ALL. Not in "dwork_struct" and 
not in "queue_dwork()".

"dwork" just sounds d[w]orky. More importantly, we don't use short-hand 
that isn't obvious, unless there is some industry-standard and old meaning 
to it that everybody understands. "delayed_work" may be more typing, but 
anybody who needs to type things that fast had better slow down anyway to 
_think_.

No excuses for short and unreadable names.

		Linus
-
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/