Re: [PATCH 4/4] writeback: harmonize writeback threads and tasks - 3

[Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>]

On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 11:33 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 10:49:54AM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > From: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
> > 
> > The write-back code mixes words "thread" and "task" for the
> > same things - this is not a problem, but this is still an
> > inconsistency which makes it a bit difficult to read the code.
> > It is better to use term "thread" consistently everywhere.
> > 
> > This patch amends commentaries and makes them refer the forker thread and the
> > write-back threads as "threads", not "tasks".
> 
> A convention I tend to use and I've seen in various places is to always
> use _task for the storage of the task_struct pointer, and thread
> everywhere else.  This especially helps with having foo_thread for the
> actual thread and foo_task for a global variable keeping the
> task_struct pointer.

OK, thanks for feed-back, then I'll drop the patch which renames
bdi->wb.task to bdi->wb.thread. Namely, this one:

[PATCH 3/4] writeback: harmonize writeback threads and tasks - 2

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html