[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mempool: rename functions with confusing names

[Wiles, Keith]

On 6/29/16, 11:00 AM, "dev on behalf of Bruce Richardson" <dev-bounces at dpdk.org on behalf of bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:

>On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 05:55:27PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> 2016-06-29 14:55, Bruce Richardson:
>> > The mempool_count and mempool_free_count behaved contrary to what their
>> > names suggested. The free_count function actually returned the number of
>> > elements that were allocated from the pool, not the number unallocated as
>> > the name implied.
>> > 
>> > Fix this by introducing two new functions to replace the old ones,
>> > * rte_mempool_unallocated_count to replace rte_mempool_count
>> > * rte_mempool_allocated_count to replace rte_mempool_free_count
>> 
>> What about available/used instead of unallocated/allocated?
>> 
>
>I don't particularly mind what the name is, to be honest. I like "avail"
>because it is shorter, but I'm a little uncertain about "used", because it
>implies that the entries are finished with i.e. like a used match, or tissue :-)
>
>How about "avail/in_use"?

+1 for those names.
>
>/Bruce
>