Re: [RFC PATCH 3/5] cfq-iosched: reimplement priorities usingdifferent service trees

[Jens Axboe]

On Tue, Oct 20 2009, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 19 2009, Corrado Zoccolo wrote:
> >> We use different service trees for different priority classes.
> >> This allows a simplification in the service tree insertion code, that no
> >> longer has to consider priority while walking the tree.
> >
> >> +enum wl_prio_t {
> >> +     IDLE_WL = -1,
> >> +     BE_WL = 0,
> >> +     RT_WL = 1
> >> +};
> >
> > WL?
> It stands for "workload". When defining all-caps constants, one has to
> avoid possible clashes adding pre/suf-fixes.
> Any suggestion for better naming?

Nobody will guess that. Make variable/enum names as short as possible,
but not so short that their meaning are incomprehensible. Suggestion
would be to use IDLE_WORKLOAD etc.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/