Hi Zack, Please use reply-all; I've restored the Cc's On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 09:48:43AM -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021, at 7:50 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:11:05PM -0300, André Almeida wrote: > >> Returns the array index of one of the awakened futexes. There’s no given > >> information of how many were awakened, or any particular attribute of it > >> (if it’s the first awakened, if it is of the smaller index...). > > > > As per some native speakers on IRC, awaken isn't the right word. I've > > changed it like the below. > > "woken" and "awoken" are also not the right word (my brain flags both > as spelling errors). Suggestions below: > > > - * Returns the array index of one of the awaken futexes. There's no given > > - * information of how many were awakened, or any particular attribute of it (if > > - * it's the first awakened, if it is of the smaller index...). > > + * Returns the array index of one of the woken futexes. There's no given > > + * information of how many were woken, or any particular attribute of it (if > > + * it's the first woken, if it is of the smaller index...). > > "awakened" was the correct word in all three places here. The > sentences are awkward, I might suggest Afaict it's a bit of a mess. I googled the thing and there's apparently 2 verbs with identical meaning but different inflections: awake (irregular): awake, awoke (awaked), awoken (awaken) awaken (regular): awaken, awakened, awakened. Now the thing is, the futex operation is FUTEX_WAKE, not FUTEX_AWAKEN, therefore I think we should be going with the first (irregular) verb, which then gets me 'woken'. ( also, 'awaked' gets me the mental image of a hillbilly, but that might just be me -- the forms were all suggested by meriam-webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/usage-awaken-awoken-awakened for further confusion also see: https://www.grammar.com/awake-awaken-wake-waken ) > # Returns the array index of one of the awakened futexes. > # No further information is provided: any number of other > # futexes may also have been awakened by the same event, and > # if more than one futex was awakened, the returned index may > # refer to any one of them. (It is not necessarily the futex > # with the smallest index, nor the one most recently awakened, > # nor ...) Aside of the whole wake mess, I do like that better, let me go make that happen. > > - * absorb any awake events, which cannot be done before the > > + * loose any wake events, which cannot be done before the > > 'wake events' is correct here, but you introduced an unrelated error: > 'loose' is the opposite of 'tight', you want 'lose' with only one O. I shall forever make that mistake :-(
