Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-20 Thread Michel Lespinasse
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: >> Having the function name indicate what the function is used >> for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, >> the fault handling code largely consists of do__page

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-20 Thread Michel Lespinasse
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra a.p.zijls...@chello.nl wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely consists of

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-19 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Rik van Riel wrote: > On 10/19/2012 07:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > >>Having the function name indicate what the function is used > >>for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, > >>the fault handling code largely

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-19 Thread Rik van Riel
On 10/19/2012 07:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely consists of do__page functions. I

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-19 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > Having the function name indicate what the function is used > for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, > the fault handling code largely consists of do__page > functions. I don't much care either way, but I was

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-19 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely consists of do__page functions. I don't much care either way, but I was thinking

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-19 Thread Rik van Riel
On 10/19/2012 07:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely consists of do__page functions. I

Re: [PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-19 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Rik van Riel r...@redhat.com wrote: On 10/19/2012 07:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:20 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely

[PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-18 Thread Rik van Riel
Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely consists of do__page functions. Rename the NUMA fault handling functions to indicate what they are used for. Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel ---

[PATCH 2/2] rename NUMA fault handling functions

2012-10-18 Thread Rik van Riel
Having the function name indicate what the function is used for makes the code a little easier to read. Furthermore, the fault handling code largely consists of do__page functions. Rename the NUMA fault handling functions to indicate what they are used for. Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel