Re: [PATCH 2/2] async: Add some documentation.

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 05:43:06PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> Add some kerneldoc to the async interface.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
> +/**
> + * async_schedule_special - schedule a function for asynchronous execution with a special running queue
> + * @ptr: function to execute asynchronously
> + * @data: data pointer to pass to the function
> + * @running: list head to add to while running
> + *
> + * Returns an async_cookie_t that may be used for checkpointing later.
> + * @running may be used in the async_synchronize_*_special() functions
> + * to wait on a special running queue rather than on the global running
> + * queue.
> + * Note: This function may be called from atomic or non-atomic contexts.
> + */
>  async_cookie_t async_schedule_special(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data, struct list_head *running)

Rather than polishing a turd, can we rename this "special" stuff to
something more descriptive? I'm not the only person to complain
about this. How about async_schedule_list()?

After all, async_schedule_list() describes *exactly* how it is
different to async_schedule(), while the "_special" keywords really
suck when you consider code is supposed to be self documenting....

> +/**
> + * async_synchronize_cookie_special - synchronize asynchronous function calls on a running list with cookie checkpointing
> + * @cookie: async_cookie_t to use as checkpoint
> + * @running: running list to synchronize on

And I think that description proves my point about the real
meaning of "special" in this API.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com