Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups+ docs

[Steven Rostedt]

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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/