[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250814084051.QU77fjQo@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2025 10:40:51 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rt-devel@...ts.linux.dev, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Clark Williams <clrkwllms@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation: locking: Add local_lock_nested_bh()
to locktypes
On 2025-07-15 14:10:23 [-0600], Jonathan Corbet wrote:
…
> > +A local_lock_t together with local_lock_nested_bh() and
> > +local_unlock_nested_bh() for locking operations help to identify the locking
> > +scope.
> > +
> > +With lockdep is enabled, these functions verify that data structure access
>
> Did you mean *When* lockdep is enabled?
Lets do "When". I most likely should have removed the "is".
> Otherwise no complaints here.
Thanks.
>
> jon
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists