Re: [PATCH 00/10] jump label: introduce very_[un]likely + cleanups + docs

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

The bike shed is getting really dark.

On Wed, 2012-02-22 at 09:20 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>  
> [...]
> One possible naming that might be a good fit:
> 
> - read_always_likely()
> - read_always_unlikely()
> - read_always_branch()
> 
> I think it is important to convey both that it is expected to be always
> read, pretty much never updated, and the bias, or absence of bias.

That actually looks even more confusing. "read_always"? What the hell is
that?

> 
> I also _like_ to have a relatively long name here, because the update
> cost is so high that someone should really think before using this
> facility. In my opinion, it's not "just" a stronger likely/unlikely.

Then make it what it is (with a long name...)

	if (jump_label_likely())

	if (jump_label_unlikely())

That's probably the least confusing of the names. And for the cases we
don't care:

	if (jump_label_branch())

The above is the most descriptive and I would say the least confusing.
Someone on IRC said that they wish it had jump_label in the name. As
they see there's a "CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL" it tells us where those jump
labels are used.

Need to go and knock down the bike shed now.

-- Steve