This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add environment variable tuning for elision parameters.
- From: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
- To: Andi Kleen <andi at firstfloor dot org>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Andi Kleen <ak at linux dot jf dot intel dot com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:44:40 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add environment variable tuning for elision parameters.
- References: <1371232449-12102-1-git-send-email-andi at firstfloor dot org> <1371232449-12102-3-git-send-email-andi at firstfloor dot org> <1371481072 dot 16968 dot 21017 dot camel at triegel dot csb> <20130617175838 dot GI6123 at two dot firstfloor dot org>
On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 19:58 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > + if (strncmp (s, "elision", 7) == 0 && (s[7] == 0 || s[7] == ':'))
> > > + {
> > > + __pthread_force_elision = __elision_available;
> > > + if (s[7] == ':')
> > > + elision_aconf_setup (s + 8);
> > > + }
> > > + else if (strncmp (s, "none", 4) == 0 && s[4] == 0)
> >
> > This should be "no_elision" or something like that. A setting like
> > "GLIBC_PTHREAD_MUTEX=none" is confusing: no what? no mutexes?
>
> I can add an alias, but I personally prefer none.
I don't think an alias is what we want. Instead, we want the external
interface to be clear, and I can't see how "MUTEX=none" is clear: None
of what? What if we add other tunables for mutexes, to which "none"
could apply as well? Is there a reason to prefer "none" over something
more descriptive (eg, "no_elision") beyond your personal preference?