On 10/04, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 09:06:53PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > However, yes-yes-yes, I do think that we need the non-exclusive mode > > too, at least for percpu_down_write_nonexclusive() which I think we > > need as well. > > I just need to disagree with the write_nonexclusive() name; the > construct I quite understand and could even agree with. > > How about something like:
I am fine either way ;) > At which point I start to have doubts about the percpu prefix.. ;-) Yes... and "percpu" just refers to implementation details, this is pointless. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
