Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:21:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:21:53 -0400 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:15325 "HELO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Mon, 22 Jul 2002 09:21:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 15:23:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: Ingo Molnar To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Russell King , Linus Torvalds , Robert Love , Subject: Re: [patch] cli()/sti() cleanup, 2.5.27-A2 In-Reply-To: <20020722152056.A18619@lst.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 945 Lines: 33 On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > irq_off() > > irq_on() > > irq_save(flags) > > irq_save_off(flags) > > irq_restore(flags) > > I'd prefer the following: > > void irq_off(void); > void irq_on(void); > > flags_t irq_save(); /* the old irq_save_off() */ > void irq_restore(flags_t); > > void __irq_save(void); /* without saveing */ > > rational: proper function-like API (should be inlines), irq save > without disableing is very uncommon, better make the API symmetric. i agree mostly, but i do not agree with __irq_save() and irq_save(). What's wrong with "flags_t irq_save_off()" - the name carries the proper meaning, and it also harmonizes with irq_off(). Ingo - 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/