* Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Propose a better way to code this then? It's not my fault that dealing
> with callbacks in C is so messy. _here just massages one callback
> prototype (smp_call_function's) into another (cpufreq's) because both
> callbacks do the same in this case.
see the last iteration of the cleanups i did. Naming the function after
what it does, and prefixing the preempt-unsafe one __ does the trick.
> The r_s_f BTW stands for resync_sc_freq which is a function earlier in
> the file and should be familiar to a serious reader.
I consider myself a serious reader and it wasnt obvious to me. Names
must always be descriptive, we cannot hold all the details in our heads
all the time.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
