On 19/11/2024 23:02, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 11:09 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Names don't match here. I prefer _CONTINUE. As for the general one,
>> I'm on the fence about INTERRUPT_GENERAL_WAKEUP, since wakeups aren't
>> necessarily involved, but I don't have a specific better idea so I'm
>> not objecting... Perhaps it's more like INTERRUPT_GENERAL_NOTIFY,
>> except that _NOTIFY is already a well known thing, and the procsignal
>> patch introduces INTERRUPT_NOTIFY...
>
> INTERRUPT_GENERAL with no third word isn't out of the question, either.
I like that
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
