[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30258.1457597615@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 08:13:35 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, corbet@....net,
minchan@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] doc/memory-barriers: fix missed renaming: s/lock/acquire
SeongJae Park <sj38.park@...il.com> wrote:
> - - Locking functions.
> + - Acquiring functions.
Actually, this should be 'locking' functions. If you look at the text:
ACQUIRING FUNCTIONS
-------------------
The Linux kernel has a number of locking constructs:
(*) spin locks
(*) R/W spin locks
(*) mutexes
(*) semaphores
(*) R/W semaphores
It's specifically talking about locking functions that the kernel provides -
or are we calling the spin acquires and R/W spin acquires now? "Locking" is
the key that people referring to the document are going to use.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists