Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:46:51 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH memory-barriers.txt 2/7] documentation: Fix missed renaming: s/lock/acquire |
| |
On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 08:52:50AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > From: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@gmail.com> > > Terms `lock` and `unlock` have changed to `acquire` / `release` by > commit 2e4f5382d12a441b5cccfdde00308df15c2ce300 ("locking/doc: Rename > LOCK/UNLOCK to ACQUIRE/RELEASE"). However, the commit missed to change > the table of content. This commit changes the missed parts. > Also, section name `Acquiring functions` is not appropriate for the > section because the section is saying about lock in actual. This commit > changes the name to more appropriate name, `Lock acquisition functions`. >
True, because of this ppc thing :/
If we get PPC to switch to RCsc locks, there actually is a difference again.
Given the current state I'm not sure how much we should care, but there's a fundamental difference between things like load-acquire and acquiring a lock, in that the lock-acquire must also very much imply a store.
In any case, these are jet-lagged ramblings, feel free to ignore :-)
| |