Message-ID: <1329856745.25686.72.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups
 + docs
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu,
        mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, davem@davemloft.net,
        ddaney.cavm@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:39:05 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20120221202019.GB2381@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1329851692.git.jbaron@redhat.com>
	 <4F43F9F0.4000605@zytor.com> <20120221202019.GB2381@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 786
Lines: 23

On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 15:20 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:

> I'm not really too hung up on the naming, but I did think that
> very_[un]likely were an interesting possibility.

The problem comes from what Peter said. They are too similar to
"likely()" and "unlikely()", and can become confusing.

Maybe "static_likely()" and "static_unlikely()" as the word "static" can
imply something strange about these. Or perhaps a "const_likely()"?

Maybe "dynamic_branch_true()" and "dynamic_branch_false()". This may be
the most descriptive.

-- Steve


--
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/