On 29.07.2019 14:12, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> --- a/xen/include/xen/nodemask.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/nodemask.h
> @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@
>   * The available nodemask operations are:
>   *
>   * void node_set(node, mask)         turn on bit 'node' in mask
> + * void __nodemask_set(node, mask)   turn on bit 'node' in mask (unlocked)
>   * void node_clear(node, mask)               turn off bit 'node' in mask
> + * void __nodemask_clear(node, mask) turn off bit 'node' in mask (unlocked)

To be honest I'm unhappy to see you introduce new name space
violations. I realize you want to have the node mask interfaces
match the CPU mask one as closely as possible, but I think we
should diverge here (and eventually make the CPU mask ones
follow whatever route we go here). As to naming, since these
are static inlines, a single leading underscore may be an
option (albeit I'd prefer to avoid this). Another option would
be to have double infix underscores (nodemask__set()). Yet
another option would be to express the non-atomicity in a
verbal way rather than by the number of underscores used. I'm
afraid I don't have a good naming suggestion in that case,
though.

Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Reply via email to