Bug #909
ssleep() (was Re: mention msleep() in porting_drivers.txt)
| Status: | Closed | Start date: | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Due date: | ||
| Assignee: | - | % Done: | 0% |
|
| Category: | - | |||
| Target version: | - |
Description
Now that I think about it, our msleep() is misnamed --- it should have
been called ssleep(). There's no "m" about it. Any objections to changing it?
Jeffrey
Related todos
History
Updated by dillon over 5 years ago
:Now that I think about it, our msleep() is misnamed --- it should have
:been called ssleep(). There's no "m" about it. Any objections to changing it?
:
: Jeffrey
If we're gonna start throwing around different types of sleeps maybe
we should make the names more verbose. spin_sleep(), lockmgr_sleep(),
etc. We don't use them so often that they'll clutter up the code and
the longer names will make the code more readable.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
Updated by TGEN over 5 years ago
+1
Updated by corecode over 5 years ago
Could we please delay changing the name? There is a lot of work
happening and it is frustrating if you have to chase the code.
cheers
simon
Updated by tuxillo over 3 years ago
What was the final conclusion about this?
Renaming will happen or it will be dropped?
Updated by dillon over 3 years ago
I will revamp the *sleep() calls. Yes, at this point I think msleep() should
become ssleep() so msleep() can be used with mutex locks (mtx_t).
I will also change the serialize_sleep() calls to slzsleep(), since it looks
like we've given up on using longer names.
-Matt
Updated by tuxillo over 3 years ago
Renaming committed by Dillon.
e590ee86dda0f2b481981c8e73628e26c29e72d5