From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/15] cfq-iosched: More renaming to better represent wl_class and wl_type Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:25:00 -0400 Message-ID: <20121002132500.GA758@redhat.com> References: <1349119976-26837-1-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> <1349119976-26837-3-git-send-email-vgoyal@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jeff Moyer Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, tj@kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 04:50:37PM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote: > Vivek Goyal writes: > > > Also at places I have got rid of keyword "serving" as it is obivious. > > I don't agree with getting rid of serving. After your patch, it looks > as though a cfqd has a static workload class and type. It reads better > to me the way it is. It is also about the length of name. To me now a days CFQ code looks pretty messy with very long names or lines at many a places. So yes, "cfqd->serving_wl_class" and "cfqd->serving_wl_type" is more readable than "cfqd->wl_class" and "cfqd->wl_type". But it also increases the string length significantly. I don't know. Some of the strings seem too long and code spills into multiple lines for a single statement. Anyway, for this I guess I will retain "serving" keyword. Thanks Vivek