Re: [PATCHSET x86/core/percpu] improve the first percpu chunkallocation

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wednesday 25 February 2009 07:46:59 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >  kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c: In function âgraph_trace_closeâ:
> >  kernel/trace/trace_functions_graph.c:836: error: implicit declaration of function âpercpu_freeâ
> > 
> > that's free_percpu() now, right?
> > 
> > Btw., why was this rename done? We generally standardize on 
> > hierarchical names, going from the more general to the more 
> > specific names, left to right.
> 
> Agreed, but we had both, doing identical things, and 
> free_percpu outnumbered percpu_free by a significant factor 
> (about 40 to 5 IIRC).

40 places to rename => peanuts! :-)

> Simple pragmatism, and it matches alloc_percpu.

it also matches other allocator mis-namings in mm/*.c.
I concur.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/