On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:36:29PM +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Imho, the current naming of cancel_xxx workqueue functions is very confusing.
>
> cancel_delayed_work()
> cancel_rearming_delayed_work()
> cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue() // obsolete
>
> cancel_work_sync()
>
> This looks as if the first 2 functions differ in "type" of their argument which
> is not true any longer, nowadays the difference is the behaviour.
>
> The semantics of cancel_rearming_delayed_work(dwork) was changed significantly,
> it doesn't require that dwork rearms itself, and cancels dwork synchronously.
>
> Rename it to cancel_delayed_work_sync(). This matches cancel_delayed_work() and
> cancel_work_sync(). Re-create cancel_rearming_delayed_work() as a simple inline
> obsolete wrapper, like cancel_rearming_delayed_workqueue().
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Jarek Poplawski <[email protected]>
-
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]
