Re: [PATCH v3 06/20] seqlock: Extend seqcount API with associated locks

[Ahmed S. Darwish]

On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 11:12:01AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 04:37:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > + * Use the ``_irqsave`` and ``_bh`` variants instead if the read side
> > + * ``_bh`` variant of write_seqlock(). Use only if the read side section
> > + * ``_irq`` variant of write_sequnlock(). The write side section of
> > + * ``_irqsave`` variant of write_seqlock(). Use if the read section of
> > + * ``_irqrestore`` variant of write_sequnlock(). The write section of
> > + * ``_bh`` variant of read_seqlock_excl(). Use this variant if the
> > + * ``_bh`` variant of read_sequnlock_excl(). The closed section must've
> > + * ``_irq`` variant of read_seqlock_excl(). Use this only if the
> > + * ``_irq`` variant of read_sequnlock_excl(). The closed section must've
> > + * ``_irqsave`` variant of read_seqlock_excl(). Use this only if the
> > + * ``_irqrestore`` variant of read_sequnlock_excl(). The closed section
> > + * This is the ``_irqsave`` variant of read_seqbegin_or_lock(). Use if
> > + * This is the ``_irqrestore`` variant of done_seqretry(). The read
>
> Can we also get rid of that '' nonsense, the gods of ASCII gifted us "
> for this.

Hehe, why not. I welcome back our ASCII overlords.