Old BHs have been almost completely replaced with tasklets and softirqs.
Should we then rename _bh to _softirq ?
i.e
local_bh_disable() -> local_softirq_disable()
spin_lock_bh() -> spin_lock_softirq()
bh_lock_sock() -> softirq_sock_lock()
etc
Or maybe just 'si' if softirq is too long.
bh prefix and postfix seem to be confusing now.
Max
http://bluez.sf.net
http://vtun.sf.net
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/