Re: [PATCH 2/6] Rename __lock_page to lock_page_slow

[Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@in.ibm.com>]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 09:52:37AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> 
> I have to whine at least once about obscure names :)
> 
> > -void fastcall __lock_page(struct page *page)
> > +void fastcall lock_page_slow(struct page *page)
> >  {
> >  	DEFINE_WAIT_BIT(wait, &page->flags, PG_locked);
> >  
> >  	__wait_on_bit_lock(page_waitqueue(page), &wait, sync_page,
> >  							TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
> >  }
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(__lock_page);
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(lock_page_slow);
> 
> Can we chose a name that describes what it does?  Something like
> lock_page_wait_on_locked()?

The usage of the _slow suffix was inspired from fs/buffer.c,
__bread_slow, __find_get_block_slow, __getblk_slow etc.

I actually have an earlier version with the name changes you had
suggested earlier ... but then wasn't sure if these are really
much better, wanted to hear what others had to say. I do not have
any particular affinities, will go with whatever is the general
consensus.

Regards
Suparna

> 
> - z

-- 
Suparna Bhattacharya (suparna@in.ibm.com)
Linux Technology Center
IBM Software Lab, India