From: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@xxxxxxxxx> One warning message in 'atomic_ops.rst' is not using 'warning' rst directive while others does. This commit modifies the message to use 'warning' rst directive. Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst | 10 ++++++---- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst b/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst index 4ea4af71e68a..2e7165f86f55 100644 --- a/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst +++ b/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst @@ -466,10 +466,12 @@ Like the above, except that these routines return a boolean which indicates whether the changed bit was set _BEFORE_ the atomic bit operation. -WARNING! It is incredibly important that the value be a boolean, -ie. "0" or "1". Do not try to be fancy and save a few instructions by -declaring the above to return "long" and just returning something like -"old_val & mask" because that will not work. + +.. warning:: + It is incredibly important that the value be a boolean, ie. "0" or "1". + Do not try to be fancy and save a few instructions by declaring the + above to return "long" and just returning something like "old_val & + mask" because that will not work. For one thing, this return value gets truncated to int in many code paths using these interfaces, so on 64-bit if the bit is set in the -- 2.5.2
