linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation: in

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210814014455.wffdzvtgz54y6mgn@mail.google.com>
Date:   Sat, 14 Aug 2021 09:44:55 +0800
From:   Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>,
        Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...a.pv.it>,
        Alex Shi <alexs@...nel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: in_irq() cleanup

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 09:44:28AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com> writes:
> 
> > Replace the obsolete and ambiguos macro in_irq() with new
> > macro in_hardirq().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst                    | 2 +-
> >  Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst                    | 4 ++--
> >  Documentation/translations/it_IT/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst | 2 +-
> >  Documentation/translations/it_IT/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 4 ++--
> >  Documentation/translations/zh_CN/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst | 2 +-
> >  5 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
> > index df65c19aa7df..f514cec8e16b 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
> > @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ fast: frequently it simply acknowledges the interrupt, marks a 'software
> >  interrupt' for execution and exits.
> >  
> >  You can tell you are in a hardware interrupt, because
> > -:c:func:`in_irq()` returns true.
> > +:c:func:`in_hardirq()` returns true.
> 
> While you're in the neighborhood, can you please get rid of the :c:func:
> markup?  We've not needed that for some time now; simply saying
> in_hardirq() is sufficient.
>
No problem, will updaate it soon.

> Thanks,
> 
> jon

-- 
Cheers,
Changbin Du