[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200706151244.7c4865fd@lwn.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2020 15:12:44 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Ahmed S. Darwish" <a.darwish@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
"Sebastian A. Siewior" <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/20] Documentation: locking: Describe seqlock
design and usage
On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 23:04:39 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 07:44:33AM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
> > +Sequence counters (:c:type:`seqcount_t`)
> > +========================================
>
> > +.. code-block:: c
>
> I so hate RST, of course it's C. Also, ISTR Jon saying you can leave
> that all out without issue.
The "c" enables keyword coloring and such - something I can happily do
without but others seem to care about it. If you take out that line,
though, you'll need a "::" at least to start a literal block.
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists