Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 11:31:09 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Process reapers Message-ID: <20141202093109.GG97072@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <2BBA8329-C8F4-452D-B6C2-E129FCD6D666@me.com> References: <20141201185237.GC97072@kib.kiev.ua> <2BBA8329-C8F4-452D-B6C2-E129FCD6D666@me.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 02:43:17PM -0800, Rui Paulo wrote: > One comment I have is that we could rename the variables to something more meaningful instead of "p1" or "p2". If "p1" is the reaper, we could call it "p_reaper". > p_reaper is too confusing even to write, it is the same as the name of the struct proc member. p1/p2 is the pattern used in dofork(), so I followed it for new code. I could rename p1 to something else, but also short, since LIST_* constructs are long and clumsy. Might be, s/p1/rp/ ?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20141202093109.GG97072>