On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 08:45:11AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 10:35:50AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > - _____sys_waitid() # ridiculous number of underscores? > > > - __sys_waitid() # too generic sounding? > > > > ... and we'd need to rename internal helpers in net/ > > > > > - __inline_sys_waitid() # too long? > > > > sounds acceptable, though a bit long (especially for the compat case, though > > it doesn't really matter in the case of > > __inline_compat_sys_sched_rr_get_interval) > > So as per the previous mail this is not just an inline function, but an active > type conversion wrapper that sign-extends 32-bit ints to longs, which is important > on some 64-bit architectures. > > And that's a really non-obvious property IMO, and the name should probably reflect > _that_ non-obvious property, not the inlining property which is really just a > small detail. > > I.e. how about: > > __se_sys_waitid() > > ... where 'se' stands for sign-extended, with a comment in the macro that explains > the prefix? (The historical abbreviation for sign extension is 'sext', which I > think wouldn't really be suitable these days.) Agreed. Could you do that when applying my patches, please? Thanks, Dominik
