On 5/21/21 2:29 AM, Xiongwei Song wrote:
From: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@xxxxxxxxx>
The block condition matrix is using 'E' as the writer noation here, so it
would be better to use 'E' as the reminder rather than 'W'.
Signed-off-by: Xiongwei Song <sxwjean@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst b/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst
index 9f3cfca..c3b923a 100644
--- a/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst
+++ b/Documentation/locking/lockdep-design.rst
@@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ Block condition matrix, Y means the row blocks the column, and N means otherwise
| R | Y | Y | N |
+---+---+---+---+
- (W: writers, r: non-recursive readers, R: recursive readers)
+ (E: writers, r: non-recursive readers, R: recursive readers)
acquired recursively. Unlike non-recursive read locks, recursive read locks
I would say it should be the other way around. Both W and E refer to the
same type of lockers. W emphasizes writer aspect of it and E for
exclusive. I think we should change the block condition matrix to use W
instead of E.
Cheers,
Longman
