[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZkXZyijVOdtxu763@J2N7QTR9R3>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 12:02:50 +0200
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/atomic: scripts: fix ${atomic}_sub_and_test()
kerneldoc
On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 11:49:20AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 10:53:10AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 10:45:58AM +0200, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 01:37:10PM +0000, Carlos Llamas wrote:
> > > > For ${atomic}_sub_and_test() the @i parameter is the value to subtract,
> > > > not add. Fix the typo in the kerneldoc template and generate the headers
> > > > with this update.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: ad8110706f38 ("locking/atomic: scripts: generate kerneldoc comments")
> > > > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > > > Suggested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Notes:
> > > > v2: fix kerneldoc template instead, as pointed out by Mark
> > >
> > > Thanks for this!
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > >
> > > Peter, Ingo, are you happy to queue this up in the tip tree?
> >
> > Yep can do. I'll sit on it until after the merge window though.
>
> Also, do we really want this in stable? It's just a silly doc change.
I think that we do, so that when people look at the generated docs for
stable kernels they see the right thing.
It *should* be a trivial backport, anyhow.
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists