Re: [PATCH] preempt abstraction

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Tue, Jan 08, 2002 at 01:57:28PM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
> Why not use the more commonly named conditional_schedule instead of
> preempt() ?  In addition to being more in-use (low-latency, lock-break,
> and Andrea's aa patch all use it) I think it better conveys its meaning,
> which is a schedule() but only conditionally.

I think the choice is very subjective, but I prefer preempt().
It's nicely short to type (!) and similar in spirit to Ingo's yield()..

	Christoph