Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756648Ab2BWWqQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:46:16 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:53978 "EHLO mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755023Ab2BWWqO (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:46:14 -0500 Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linus971@gmail.com designates 10.180.107.68 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=linus971@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=linus971@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120223223348.GA25513@elte.hu> References: <4F43F9F0.4000605@zytor.com> <20120221202019.GB2381@redhat.com> <1329856745.25686.72.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20120222073251.GB17291@elte.hu> <20120222075334.GA25053@elte.hu> <7479958c-1932-4ced-a7a4-53ac6ea3a38e@email.android.com> <20120222081855.GB25318@elte.hu> <20120222213343.GA19758@bloggs.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20120223100205.GD24310@elte.hu> <20120223223348.GA25513@elte.hu> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:45:53 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: sNUGi33fYhD4Fz67p2d7_n8beps Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups + docs To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Paul Mackerras , "H. Peter Anvin" , Steven Rostedt , Jason Baron , a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, davem@davemloft.net, ddaney.cavm@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1241 Lines: 30 On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > At the risk of being flamed some more, where does the confusion > stem from? >From the fact that "very" is an English word that means "very", and "unlikely()" and "likely()" are already used in their obvious meaning. So quite frankly, "very_unlikely()" quite naturally means something else than you are trying to make it mean. The fact that EVERY SINGLE OTHER OPERATION that worked on that data structure used to be named "jump_label_xyz()" and is now named "static_key_xyz()" is also a big clue, I think. Naming it anything else was always a mistake. Seriously, I don't understand why you don't just use the obvious name. The data structure is named "static_key". The things that change it are named "static_key_inc()" or something. So a name like "static_key_true()" is simply *better*, isn't it? It's not just about less confusion, it's actually about just having consistent naming. 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/