* Federico Vaga <federico.v...@vaga.pv.it> wrote:
> On Saturday, August 31, 2019 4:43:44 PM CEST Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 15:41:16 +0200
> >
> > Federico Vaga <federico.v...@vaga.pv.it> wrote:
> > > several CPU's and you want to use spinlocks you can potentially use
> > >
> > > -cheaper versions of the spinlocks. IFF you know that the spinlocks are
> > > +cheaper versions of the spinlocks. If you know that the spinlocks are
> > >
> > > never used in interrupt handlers, you can use the non-irq versions::
> > I suspect that was not actually a typo; "iff" is a way for the
> > mathematically inclined to say "if and only if".
> >
> > jon
>
> I learned something new today :)
>
> I am not used to the mathematical English jargon. It make sense, but then I
> would replace it with "If and only if": for clarity.
While it's used in a number of places and it's pretty common wording
overall in the literature, I agree that we should probably change this in
locking API user facing documentation.
If you change it, please do it in both places it's used.
Thanks,
Ingo
