Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Feb 2022 15:49:08 +0900 | From | Sergey Senozhatsky <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH printk v1 01/13] printk: rename cpulock functions |
| |
On (22/02/11 13:44), Petr Mladek wrote: > On Mon 2022-02-07 20:49:11, John Ogness wrote: > > Since the printk cpulock is CPU-reentrant and since it is used > > in all contexts, its usage must be carefully considered and > > most likely will require programming locklessly. To avoid > > mistaking the printk cpulock as a typical lock, rename it to > > cpu_sync. The main functions then become: > > > > printk_cpu_sync_get_irqsave(flags); > > printk_cpu_sync_put_irqrestore(flags); > > It is possible that I will understand the motivation later when > reading the entire patchset. But my initial reaction is confusion ;-) > > From mo POV, it is a lock. It tries to get exclusive access and > has to wait until the current owner releases it.
printk has been using enter/exit naming for a while now (starting with nmi enter/exit, then printk_safe enter/exit and soon direct enter/exit); so may be we can follow suit here and use printk_cpu_sync_enter() and printk_cpu_sync_exit()?
> After all the word "lock" is part of "deadlock".
That's a good one.
| |