Re: [RFC][PATCH 6/8] perf: Per PMU disable

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 18:21 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 09:11:58AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 04:14 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 06:00:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > +static void armpmu_pmu_enable(struct pmu *pmu)
> > > >  {
> > > > +static void powerpc_pmu_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu)
> > > >  {
> > > > +static void fsl_emb_pmu_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu)
> > > >  {
> > > > +static void sh_pmu_pmu_enable(struct pmu *pmu)
> > > > +{
> > > > +static void sparc_pmu_pmu_enable(struct pmu *pmu)
> > > >  {
> > > > +static void x86_pmu_pmu_disable(struct pmu *pmu)
> > > >  {
> > > 
> > > 
> > > These namings are really bad. Why not just using pmu once
> > > in each names? x86_pmu_enable, etc...
> > 
> > Because some of those were already taken:
> > 
> > static const struct pmu pmu = {
> >         .enable         = x86_pmu_enable,
> >         .disable        = x86_pmu_disable,
> 
> 
> Then those should be renamed into x86_event_enable or so. 
> 
well, possibly, but the patches were large enough already.
--
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/