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]
Date:   Mon, 02 Sep 2019 09:01:26 +0200
From:   Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc:lock: remove reference to clever use of read-write lock

On Saturday, August 31, 2019 4:43:44 PM CEST Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 15:41:16 +0200
> 
> Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it> wrote:
> >  several CPU's and you want to use spinlocks you can potentially use
> > 
> > -cheaper versions of the spinlocks. IFF you know that the spinlocks are
> > +cheaper versions of the spinlocks. If you know that the spinlocks are
> > 
> >  never used in interrupt handlers, you can use the non-irq versions::
> I suspect that was not actually a typo; "iff" is a way for the
> mathematically inclined to say "if and only if".
> 
> jon

I learned something new today :)

I am not used to the mathematical English jargon. It make sense, but then I 
would replace it with "If and only if": for clarity.


-- 
Federico Vaga



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ