On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Daniel Wagner wrote: > + > +extern void swake_up(struct swait_queue_head *q); > +extern void swake_up_all(struct swait_queue_head *q); > +extern void swake_up_locked(struct swait_queue_head *q); I intentionally named these functions swait_wake* in my initial implementation for two reasons: - typoing wake_up vs. swake_up only emits a compiler warning and does not break the build - I really prefer new infrastructure to have a consistent prefix which reflects the "subsystem". That's simpler to read and simpler to grep for. > +extern void __prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait); > +extern void prepare_to_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state); > +extern long prepare_to_swait_event(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait, int state); > + > +extern void __finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait); > +extern void finish_swait(struct swait_queue_head *q, struct swait_queue *wait); Can we please go with the original names? swait_prepare() swait_prepare_locked() swait_finish() swait_finish_locked() Hmm? > +#define swait_event(wq, condition) \ Here we have the same swait vs. wait problem as above. So either we come up with a slightly different name or have an explicit type check in __swait_event event. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html