Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:53:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:53:00 -0400 Received: from numenor.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.58]:36230 "EHLO numenor.qualcomm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:52:56 -0400 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021014125359.0843e4d8@mail1.qualcomm.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 12:58:22 -0700 To: Ingo Molnar From: "Maksim (Max) Krasnyanskiy" Subject: Re: [RFC] Rename _bh to _softirq Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds , Alexey Kuznetsov In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021014115238.084140f8@mail1.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1162 Lines: 30 At 09:21 PM 10/14/2002 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Maksim (Max) Krasnyanskiy wrote: > > > Old BHs have been almost completely replaced with tasklets and softirqs. > > Should we then rename _bh to _softirq ? > > i.e > > local_bh_disable() -> local_softirq_disable() > > spin_lock_bh() -> spin_lock_softirq() > > bh_lock_sock() -> softirq_sock_lock() > > etc > >i wanted to do this as part of the irqlock cleanups, but generally we dont >change existing interfaces unless it's really universally agreed upon. Eg. >we had cli() around for a *long* time although it's an x86 (-mostly) >instruction name. But yes, i agree, and there are a number of other >renames that would make perfect sense. We can keep compatibility defines, just like we have for cli(). i.e. #define local_bh_disable local_softirq_disable Max - 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/