On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 02:14:41PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > [PATCH 0/1] crypto: use 'time_left' instead of 'timeout' with wait_for_*() functions 1-patch series should not have a cover letter. Just include the details in the patch itself. > There is a confusing pattern in the kernel to use a variable named 'timeout' to > store the result of wait_for_*() functions causing patterns like: > > timeout = wait_for_completion_timeout(...) > if (!timeout) return -ETIMEDOUT; > > with all kinds of permutations. Use 'time_left' as a variable to make the code > obvious and self explaining. I would understand it to be the remaining timeout, so I'm not sure the existing name is really that bad. But I agree that time_left is clearer. - Eric
