[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191028153321.GB5576@willie-the-truck>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 15:33:22 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: remove :c:func: from refcount-vs-atomic.rst
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 10:58:22AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> As of 5.3, the automarkup extension will do the right thing with function()
> notation, so we don't need to clutter the text with :c:func: invocations.
> So remove them.
>
> Looking at the generated output reveals that we lack kerneldoc coverage for
> much of this API, but that's a separate problem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> ---
> I'll feed this through docs-next unless somebody tells me otherwise...
>
> Documentation/core-api/refcount-vs-atomic.rst | 36 +++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
Certainly looks more readable to me :)
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Thanks,
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists