linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/10] rwsem: wake queued readers when writer blocks on active read lock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <10704.1274273097@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 May 2010 13:44:57 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>,
	Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
	Ying Han <yinghan@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] rwsem: wake queued readers when writer blocks on active read lock

Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com> wrote:

> +	 * Alternatively, if we're called from a failed down_write(), there
> +	 * were already threads queued before us, and there are no active
> +	 * writers, the lock must be read owned; so we try to wake any read
> +	 * locks that were queued ahead of us. */

The comma you've added after 'us' is wrong.  That suggests that the implicit
'then' comes there.  I take it you're a proponent of the Oxford/Harvard/serial
comma?

Apart from that miscellaneous grammatical difference, the patch is fine:-)

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/