"Lock-free" does not in any way imply a single process. Quite the opposite. We don't call single-thread code lock-free because all single-thread code is lock fr

"Lock-free" does not in any way imply a single process. Quite the opposite. We don't call single-thread code lock-free because all single-thread code is lock free by definition. You kind of can't use locks at all in this context, so it makes no sense to describe it as lock-free. This is like gluten-free water, complete nonsense. Lock-free code is designed for concurrent access, but using some clever tricks to handle synchronization between processes without actually invoking a lock. Lock-free explicitly means parallel.