| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20200318054425.111928-1-swboyd@chromium.org> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:44:25 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org> To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH] docs: locking: Add 'need' to hardirq section Add the missing word to make this sentence read properly. Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org> --- Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst index a8518ac0d31d..9850c1e52607 100644 --- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst +++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst @@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ by a hardware interrupt on another CPU. This is where interrupts on that cpu, then grab the lock. :c:func:`spin_unlock_irq()` does the reverse. -The irq handler does not to use :c:func:`spin_lock_irq()`, because +The irq handler does not need to use :c:func:`spin_lock_irq()`, because the softirq cannot run while the irq handler is running: it can use :c:func:`spin_lock()`, which is slightly faster. The only exception would be if a different hardware irq handler uses the same lock: base-commit: fb33c6510d5595144d585aa194d377cf74d31911 -- Sent by a computer, using git, on the internet
Powered by blists - more mailing lists