On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 21:18:16 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 03:03:59PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > I wonder if static_branch_set_false(&blah) would be a better name to > > understand. What does "disable" / "enable" mean? > > "make false" / "make true" ? Check a local dictionary. > > http://lmgtfy.com/?q=enable I know the definition on enable :-p > > "2. computing: make (a device or system) operational; active" > > A value can be true/false, an action that makes true/false is > enable/disable. enable is more "activate" and disable is more "deactivate" not "make true" and "make false". It's subtle, but there is a difference. Try switching it around in other contexts. One could "disable networking" but saying "make networking false" doesn't make sense. Technically, one can think: "activate the branch", but we are activating not the branch, but the jump label itself. It's not as clear as setting it to "true" or "false". What the static_branch does is already confusing enough, we should try to use the terminology that is as clear as possible. "set_true" is more understandable than "enable" when one can question, what exactly are we "enabling"? -- Steve -- 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/
