Re: [patch 8/9] Documentation: Fix invalid rcu assumptions

Thomas Gleixner
2009-12-11T18:09:42Z

On Fri, 11 Dec 2009, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 08:07:45AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 11 Dec 2009, David Howells wrote:
> >
> > > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > > -197 * we use RCU protection here
> > > > +196 * caller must be holding the RCU readlocke
> > >
> > > You mean "readlock" I suspect.
> >
> > Or maybe he's talking about ye olde readlocke, used widely for OS research
> > throughout the middle ages. You still find that spelling in some really
> > old CS literature.
>
> Interestingly enough, they also tended to split it into two words and
> capitalize it, as can be seen by searching for "Read Locke" at
>
> http://faculty.uml.edu/enelson/modern07.htm

The good thing about "Read Locke" is: there is no "Write Locke".

Thanks,
tglx