On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 05:18:48 +0000 Michael Witten wrote: > > Clarify and correct the return value of get_cpu() > and introduce better wording. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Witten <mfwitten@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/DocBook/kernel-hacking.tmpl | 6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-hacking.tmpl b/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-hacking.tmpl > index 92632f3..511f2f3 100644 > --- a/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-hacking.tmpl > +++ b/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-hacking.tmpl > @@ -815,9 +815,9 @@ > > <para> > <function>get_cpu()</function> disables preemption (so you won't > - suddenly get moved to another CPU) and returns the current > - processor number, between 0 and <symbol>NR_CPUS</symbol>. Note > - that the CPU numbers are not necessarily continuous. You return > + suddenly get moved to another CPU) and returns as the current > + CPU id a number on the half-open interval [0,<symbol>NR_CPUS</symbol>); > + subsequently returned CPU ids are not necessarily contiguous. You return > it again with <function>put_cpu()</function> when you are done. > </para> > <para> > -- I like the change of continous to contiguous, but the half-open interval part isn't necessarily better IMO. (yes, I know what it means.) --- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
