From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC]: mutex: adaptive spin
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:28:10 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901061125340.10871@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
References: <1230722935.4680.5.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20081231104533.abfb1cf9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1230765549.7538.8.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <87r63ljzox.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20090103191706.GA2002@parisc-linux.org> <1231093310.27690.5.camel@twins>
 <20090104184103.GE2002@parisc-linux.org> <1231242031.11687.97.camel@twins> <20090106121052.GA27232@elte.hu> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901060750410.3057@localhost.localdomain> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901060808260.3057@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner+glk-linux-kernel-3=40m.gmane.org-S1754568AbZAFQ2Y@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901060808260.3057@localhost.localdomain>
List-ID: <linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org>


On Tue, 6 Jan 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Btw, I hate the name of the helper function for that. "task_is_current()"? 
> "current" means something totally different in the linux kernel: it means 
> that the task is _this_ task.
> 
> So the only sensible implementation of "task_is_current(task)" is to just 
> make it return "task == current", but that's obviously not what the 
> function wants to do.
> 
> So it should be renamed. Something like "task_is_oncpu()" or whatever.
> 
> I realize that the scheduler internally has that whole "rq->curr" thing, 
> but that's an internal scheduler thing, and should not be confused with 
> the overall kernel model of "current".

I totally agree that we should change the name of that. I never thought 
about the confusion that it would cause to someone that is not working so 
heavy on the scheduler. Thanks for the perspective.

Sometimes us scheduler guys have our heads too much up the scheduler ass 
that all we see is scheduler crap ;-)

-- Steve