From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 042516B0169 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2011 14:19:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so3004553qyk.14 for ; Mon, 08 Aug 2011 11:19:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1312195957-12223-1-git-send-email-per.forlin@linaro.org> <1312195957-12223-2-git-send-email-per.forlin@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2011 20:19:10 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH -mmotm 1/2] fault-injection: improve naming of public function should_fail() From: Per Forlin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Akinobu Mita Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Jens Axboe , Christoph Lameter , Pekka Enberg , Matt Mackall , linux-mm@kvack.org On 8 August 2011 18:16, Akinobu Mita wrote: > 2011/8/1 Per Forlin : >> rename fault injection function should_fail() to fault_should_fail() > > fault_should_fail sounds tautological. > fault_should_inject() is better, but I'm not sure. > Should we retain the naming issue and go forward to merge mmc fault > injection first? > Fine with me. I'll go ahead and prepare the mmc failt-injection patches based on current naming. Thanks, Per -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org