Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] common/sched: Correct function prototypes

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 10.10.13 at 20:25, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/10/2013 18:05, "Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> struct vcpu pointers are traditionally v rather than d.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
>> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>> George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Acked-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>

I'll commit it as is, but ...

>> --- a/xen/include/xen/sched.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/sched.h
>> @@ -567,9 +567,9 @@ void sched_set_node_affinity(struct domain *, nodemask_t 
>> *);
>>  int  sched_id(void);
>>  void sched_tick_suspend(void);
>>  void sched_tick_resume(void);
>> -void vcpu_wake(struct vcpu *d);
>> -void vcpu_sleep_nosync(struct vcpu *d);
>> -void vcpu_sleep_sync(struct vcpu *d);
>> +void vcpu_wake(struct vcpu *v);
>> +void vcpu_sleep_nosync(struct vcpu *v);
>> +void vcpu_sleep_sync(struct vcpu *v);

... I'd much prefer if we stopped naming parameters in declarations
where the parameter types are already sufficiently describing them.
You may have noted that for quite some time patches of mine have
already been doing that (and a trace of this can even be seen in the
patch hunk header above). I would even suggest adding a
respective statement to the coding style document.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel