From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759164AbcIWLRO (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:17:14 -0400 Received: from pegasos-out.vodafone.de ([80.84.1.38]:46096 "EHLO pegasos-out.vodafone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757577AbcIWLRN (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:17:13 -0400 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.045 Authentication-Results: rohrpostix1.prod.vfnet.de (amavisd-new); dkim=pass header.i=@vodafone.de X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.6.8 pegasos-out.vodafone.de DEDD9261AAD Subject: Re: GPU-DRM-TTM: Fine-tuning for several function implementations To: SF Markus Elfring References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <4d34446f-05ad-c3ce-5d33-8fb4f25af25c@users.sourceforge.net> <05418fb1-ad66-aba3-bd8c-f6b684a83279@users.sourceforge.net> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Daniel Vetter , David Airlie , Emil Velikov , Julia Lawall , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML From: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=c3=b6nig?= Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 13:17:05 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 23.09.2016 um 13:07 schrieb SF Markus Elfring: >> It's just the names like "out" or "restart" perfectly explain why the labels exists. > I have got an other impression. > > >> So they fulfill this requirement from the coding style as far as I can see. > Short identifiers might look more convenient in some cases because > they are quicker to type. > > >> So why do you want to change them? > 1. I suggest to select identifiers also for jump labels which are more meaningful > and eventually unique for some function implementations. I completely disagree. A longer identifier is not necessarily more meaningful than a shorter one. The difference between calling a label "retry" and "lock_retry" is negligible, doesn't improve readability as far as I can see and is actually incorrect because the main meaning of the label is that we don't take the lock but rather that we restart the allocation operation. Calling the label "unlock" instead of "out" is arguable a little better, but nothing I would call a major improvement either. So that is a clear NAK to all those patches. > 2. How do you think about to add a single space character before any label? Bad as well. Why would anybody want to do this? Christian. > > Regards, > Markus