From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/memory-model: document the "one-time init" pattern Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 12:12:36 -0400 Message-ID: <20200720161236.GF1228057@rowland.harvard.edu> References: <20200717044427.68747-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200718014204.GN5369@dread.disaster.area> <20200718140811.GA1179836@rowland.harvard.edu> <20200720013320.GP5369@dread.disaster.area> <20200720145211.GC1228057@rowland.harvard.edu> <20200720153911.GX12769@casper.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200720153911.GX12769@casper.infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Dave Chinner , Eric Biggers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E . McKenney" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa , Andrea Parri , Boqun Feng , Daniel Lustig , "Darrick J . Wong" , David Howells , Jade Alglave , Luc Maranget , Nicholas Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 04:39:11PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > Honestly, even the term "release semantics" trips me up _every_ time. > It's a barrier to understanding because I have to translate it into "Oh, > he means it's like an unlock". Why can't you just say "unlock semantics"? It's not as bad as all that; people do talk about acquiring and releasing locks, and presumably you don't have any trouble understanding those terms. In fact this usage is quite common -- and I believe it's where the names "acquire semantics" and "release semantics" came from originally. Alan Stern From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from netrider.rowland.org ([192.131.102.5]:46783 "HELO netrider.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S2387991AbgGTQMh (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2020 12:12:37 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 12:12:36 -0400 From: Alan Stern Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools/memory-model: document the "one-time init" pattern Message-ID: <20200720161236.GF1228057@rowland.harvard.edu> References: <20200717044427.68747-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200718014204.GN5369@dread.disaster.area> <20200718140811.GA1179836@rowland.harvard.edu> <20200720013320.GP5369@dread.disaster.area> <20200720145211.GC1228057@rowland.harvard.edu> <20200720153911.GX12769@casper.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200720153911.GX12769@casper.infradead.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Dave Chinner , Eric Biggers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "Paul E . McKenney" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa , Andrea Parri , Boqun Feng , Daniel Lustig , "Darrick J . Wong" , David Howells , Jade Alglave , Luc Maranget , Nicholas Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon Message-ID: <20200720161236.Y67ojO3hMCDaLIrJTYKjXhsUIdXeaMFQvaiMP5U3Lbk@z> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 04:39:11PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > Honestly, even the term "release semantics" trips me up _every_ time. > It's a barrier to understanding because I have to translate it into "Oh, > he means it's like an unlock". Why can't you just say "unlock semantics"? It's not as bad as all that; people do talk about acquiring and releasing locks, and presumably you don't have any trouble understanding those terms. In fact this usage is quite common -- and I believe it's where the names "acquire semantics" and "release semantics" came from originally. Alan Stern