On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 02:14:31PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > + ===== =================================================== > + ``.`` acquired while irqs disabled and not in irq context > + ``-`` acquired in irq context > + ``+`` acquired with irqs enabled > + ``?`` acquired in irq context with irqs enabled. > + ===== =================================================== > > The bits are illustrated with an example:: > > @@ -96,14 +99,14 @@ exact case is for the lock as of the reporting time. > +--------------+-------------+--------------+ > | | irq enabled | irq disabled | > +--------------+-------------+--------------+ > - | ever in irq | ? | - | > + | ever in irq | ``?`` | ``-`` | > +--------------+-------------+--------------+ > - | never in irq | + | . | > + | never in irq | ``+`` | ``.`` | > +--------------+-------------+--------------+ > > -The character '-' suggests irq is disabled because if otherwise the > -charactor '?' would have been shown instead. Similar deduction can be > -applied for '+' too. > +The character ``-`` suggests irq is disabled because if otherwise the > +charactor ``?`` would have been shown instead. Similar deduction can be > +applied for ``+`` too. > NAK!
